M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL, MUMBAI v. THE ADDL CIT 23(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5884/MUM/2007 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 588419914 RSA 2007
Assessee PAN AALFS6310G
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 5884/MUM/2007
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL, MUMBAI
Respondent THE ADDL CIT 23(3), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted J
Tribunal Order Date 30-04-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 29-03-2010
Next Hearing Date 29-03-2010
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 13-09-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI J BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGRAWAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A NO.5122/MUM./2005 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03 I.T.A NO.5884/MUM./2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03 I.T.A NO.5885/MUM./2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 DATE OF HEARING 29.3.2010 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL G-2 RIDDHI SIDDHI APARTMENT MITHAGAR X ROAD MALAD (E) MUMBAI 400 081 AALFS6310G .. APPELLANT VS ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 23(3) 6 TH FLOOR PRATYAKSHA KAR BHAVAN C-12 BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX BANDRA MUMBAI 51 RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI B.V. JHAVERI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI L.K. AGRAWAL ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [2] O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR A.M. THESE THREE APPEALS PERTAIN TO THE SAME ASSESSEE IN VOLVE COMMON ISSUES ARISING OUT OF MATERIALLY SIMILAR SET OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S AND WERE HEARD TOGETHER. AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE THEREFORE ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE B EING DISPOSED OFF BY WAY OF THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. FIRST WE TAKE UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.5122/M UM./2005 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 3. GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: - 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING ONLY 50% O F TOTAL EXPENSES AS THE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED TO PROTECT THE BUSINE SS INTEREST OF ASSESSEE FIRM. HENCE THEY ARE TO BE FULLY ALLOWED. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE MATERIAL FACTS ARE LIKE THIS. TH E ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS INTER-ALIA OF EXPORT ING PRECIOUS BRAND AGARBATTIS (INCENSE STICKS) WHICH ARE MANUFACTURED BY ITS SIS TER CONCERN M/S. HEM CORPORATION. DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAD TO INCUR CERTAIN EXPENSES IN CONNECTION WITH TRADE MARK PRECIOUS WHICH IS OWNED BY ITS SISTER CONCERN IN RESPECT OF A LITIGATION IN U.S.A. WHILE AGARBATTIS ARE MANUFACTURED BY THE SISTER CONCERN THE ENTIRE EXPORT OF AGARBATTIS IS BEING HANDLED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [3] WAS IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES AND SINCE THE EXPENSES R ELATED TO EXPORT MARKET THE EXPENDITURE WAS BORNE BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER DECLINE D DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF THE SAME ON THE GROUND THAT THE TRADE MARK WAS OWNED BY THE SISTER CONCERN. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEA L BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO ALLOWED ONLY HALF OF THE EXPENDITURE ON THE GROUND THAT THE SISTER CONCERN OUGHT TO BEAR HALF OF THIS EXPENDITURE AS THE SISTER CONCERN ALSO HAD VALUABLE RIGHTS PROTECTED BY THE SAID LITIGATION. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. AFTER HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND ON PER USAL OF THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERING THE APPLICABLE LEGAL PO SITION AS ALSO THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEES GRIEVANCE HAS LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE ON MERITS. WE HAVE NOTED THAT THE LEARN ED CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING TO THE FACT THAT THESE EXPENDITURE WERE INCURRED IN FU RTHERANCE OF THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESS INTEREST OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE H AS NOT CHALLENGED THIS FINDING. ON THE BASIS OF THESE FINDINGS 50% OF THIS EXPENDI TURE HAVE BEEN ALLOWED. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS HOWEVER DISALLOWED REMAINING 5 0% EXPENDITURE ON THE GROUND THAT THE SISTER CONCERN OUGHT TO HAVE BORNE THE AMO UNT. THIS OBSERVATION IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW IS INDEED DEVOID OF ANY SUBSTANCE I NASMUCH AS ONCE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ACCEPTS THE BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY OF THE EXPEN DITURE IT IS NOT FOR HIM TO QUESTION AS TO HOW MUCH THE ASSESSEE AND THE SISTER CONCERN SHOULD HAVE BORNE. AS LONG AS EXPENSES ARE INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVEL Y FOR THE PURPOSES OF EARNING THE INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR PROFESSION AS IS NOW U NCONTROVERTED POSITION ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE EVEN IF SOME OF THESE EXPENSES ARE BORNE VOLUNTARILY THESE EXPENSES DO NOT CEASE TO BE DEDUCTIBLE U/S 37(1). I T WAS SO HELD BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS CHANDULAL KESHA NLAL & CO. 38 ITR 601 AND SASSON J. DAVID & CO. VS CIT 118 ITR 261. THAT APA RT ON THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [4] CASES ASSESSEE HAD BONAFIDE BUSINESS REASONS TO BE AR THE IMPUGNED EXPENSES. WE HAVE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBSTANTIAL BUSINE SS INTEREST IN PROTECTING THE VALUABLE TRADE MARK AND IT WAS THE ASSESSEE ALONE W HO WAS DOING THE ENTIRE BUSINESS IN THE U.S.A. FOR THE PRODUCTS IN RESPECT OF WHICH TRADE MARK WAS BEING SOUGHT TO BE PROTECTED. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES PARTICULAR IN THE LIGHT OF THE UNCONTROVERTED FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN O UR CONSIDERED VIEW THE DISALLOWANCE SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS IND EED ONLY FIT TO BE DELETED. WE DO SO. THE ASSESSEE GETS RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. 5. GROUND NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: - 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING ONLY 50% O F EXPENSES AS ALL THE DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFF ICER AND ALL THE EXPENSES WERE RELATING TO THE BUSINESS OF ASSESSEE FIRM. HENCE THEY ARE TO BE FULLY ALLOWED. 5. THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAD INCURRED FOREIGN TOUR EXPENSE S AGGREGATING TO RS.9 49 094/-. THE TICKET COMPONENT AGGREGATING TO RS.4 51 879/- WERE ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.4 97 215/- HAS NOT BEEN ALLOWED ON THE GROUND THAT NO DETAILS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM EXCEPT CREDIT CARD BILLS SHOWING THE AMOUNT SPENT. 6. THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER SO PASSE D BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LE ARNED CIT(A) WHO ALLOWED 50% OF THE EXPENSES ON THE GROUND THAT THE AMOUNT IS REASO NABLY SPENT BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM FOR THE STAY ABROAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUS INESS. WHILE DOING SO THE LEARNED CIT(A) INTER-ALIA OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS:- ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [5] 11. EVEN BEFORE ME THE A/R HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY E VIDENCE THAT THE DISALLOWED AMOUNT HAD INDEED BEEN SPENT FOR THE BUS INESS. FIRSTLY THE DISALLOWED AMOUNTS PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2003-04 HAVE NOT BEEN EXACTLY CLARIFIED AND THE PURPOSES HAVE NOT BEEN SPELT OUT. SECONDLY FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 THE A/R HAS MENTIONED IN HIS SUBMISSION I NTER ALIA IT IS NOT FEASIBLE AND PRACTICAL TO RETAIN EACH AND EVERY BIL L AND/OR VOUCHER. 12. CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS I AM OF THE VIEW THA T THE APPELLANT FIRM HAS NOT ESTABLISHED ITS CONTENTION. IT IS ONLY BAFFLING THAT WHEN THE AMOUNTS COULD BE LEDGERISED TO ARRIVE AT A FIGURE U NDER A PARTICULAR HEAD OF EXPENSES HOW THE SAME COULD NOT BE JUSTIFI ED WITH ANY NOTING OR NARRATION? I REFUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAD INDEED BEEN MADE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. THEREFORE I CONF IRM THE DISALLOWANCES MADE IN BOTH THE YEARS. THE GROUND TAKEN IN THIS RE GARD IS DISMISSED. 7. NOT SATISFIED BY THE STAND SO TAKEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS PERUSED THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION AS AL SO THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE. 9. THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE IS WITH RESPECT TO FOREIG N CURRENCY PURCHASES IN RESPECT OF WHICH ACTUAL SUPPORTING EVIDENCES OF EXP ENDITURE ARE NOT FILED. AN AMOUNT OF RS.4 97 215/- IS SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN SPENT FOR PURCHASE OF CURRENCY BUT BEYOND THAT THERE ARE NO BILLS OR VOUCHERS. TO THE EXTENT THE DETAILS ARE NOT FURNISHED PARTIAL DISALLOWANCE IS INDEED JUSTIFIED FOR WANT OF DETAILS. AS FOR THE BREAK-UP FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EVEN THIS BREAK-UP IN ROUND FIGURES IS DEVOID OF ANY SUPPORT OR BASIS. IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED BEFORE US T HAT HOTEL BILLS WHICH ARE PAID ON CREDIT CARDS HAVE ALSO BEEN DISALLOWED ON AD-HOC B ASIS @ 50%. WE DO NOT THINK SUCH A DISALLOWANCE IS CALLED FOR. WE THEREFORE M ODIFY THE LEARNED CIT(A)S ORDER ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [6] TO THE EXTENT THAT THE EXTENT ASSESSEE HAS BORNE AN Y DIRECT EXPENSES ON THE CREDIT CARD THE SAME SHOULD BE ALLOWED FULLY. AS FOR THE EXPENSES FOR WHICH NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE IS AVAILABLE EXCEPT FOR EVIDENCE OF PURCH ASING THE FOREIGN CURRENCY ONLY 50% OF EXPENSES ARE TO BE ALLOWED ON ESTIMATE BASIS EVEN WITHOUT BILLS AND VOUCHERS. TO THAT EXTENT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS MODIFIED. 10. THE REMAINING GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT PRESSED AND IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED AS SUCH. 11. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 12. NOW WE TAKE UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.5885/MUM ./2007 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING ONLY 50% ( AND DISALLOWING BALANCE 50%) OF EXPENSES AS THE EXPENSES WERE INCU RRED SOLELY TO PROTECT THE BUSINESS INTEREST OF ASSESSEE FIRM. HEN CE THEY ARE TO BE FULLY ALLOWED. 13. THE ISSUE ARISING OUT OF THE ABOVE GROUND IS MUTATI S MUTANDIS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND NO.1 DECIDED BY US IN THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.5 122/MUM./2005 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 VIDE PARA4 WHEREIN WE HAVE DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). IN VIEW OF OUR DIRECTIONS AS CO NTAINED IN PARA-4 ABOVE SIMILAR DIRECTIONS ARE ISSUED ON THIS GROUND ALSO. THUS TH E ASSESSEE GETS RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [7] 14. GROUND NO.2 READS AS UNDER:- 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISA LLOWANCE OF FOREIGN TOUR EXPENSES OF RS.10 14 157/- WITHOUT APP RECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER DETAILS AND BILLS FOR CURRENCY PURCHASE AND CREDIT CARD STATEME NTS. 15. THE ISSUE ARISING OUT OF THE ABOVE GROUND IS MUTATI S MUTANDIS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND NO.2 DECIDED BY US IN THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 VIDE PARA8 WHEREIN WE H AVE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE AMOUNT RECOMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF OUR DECISION PARA-9 ABOVE. SIMILAR DIRECTIONS ARE ISSUED ON THIS GROUND ALSO. THUS THE ASSESSEE GETS PARTIAL RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. 16. THE REMAINING GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER:- 3. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOW ANCE OF MEMBERSHIP AND SUBSCRIPTION EXPENSES OF RS.2 83 852 /- WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THEY ARE FOR MEMBERSHIP OF ASSESSEE FIRM ONLY AND NO ASSET IS ACQUIRED BY INCURRING THESE EXPENSE S. 17. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED RS.2 65 980/- AS CHARGES OF CL UB MAHINDRA MEMBERSHIP. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE MAIN PLACE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE IS AT MUMBAI AND CLUB MAHINDRA DOES NOT HA VE ANY RESORT IN MUMBAI. HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE CLUB MAHINDRA ARE MAINLY L OCATED FOR ENJOYING VACATION WITH THE FAMILY AND THE RESORTS ARE MAINLY LOCATED AT VARIOUS TOURIST PLACES WHICH ARE NOT CONNECTED WITH THE ASSESSEES BUSINESS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO SEEN THAT THE JOINING FEES IS FOR A PERIOD OF 25 YEARS AND TH E WHOLE EXPENDITURE CANNOT BE ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [8] ALLOWED IN ONE YEAR. HE DISALLOWED THE WHOLE EXPEND ITURE AS THE SAME IS PERSON IN NATURE. APART FROM THIS THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO DISALLOWED RS.6 372/- ON ACCOUNT OF NEW YEAR CARD MEMBERSHIP RS.4 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ACRE CLUB RS.7 500/- ON ACCOUNT OF J.W. MARRIOT MEMBERSHIP AGGREGATING TO R S.2 83 852/-. 18. THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER SO PASSE D BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LE ARNED CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. THE LEARNED CIT(A) AFFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS:- 22 . IT IS SEEN FROM THE LEDGER COPY PRESENTED BEFORE ME THAT OUT OF 11 ENTRIES MADE THEREIN BETWEEN 01.04.2003 AND 18.02.2004 THE FOLL OWING ARE WORTH THE CONSIDERATION FOR THEIR APPARENT NON-BUSINESS PURPOSES. THEY ARE MENTIONED IN BRIEF AS UNDER:- DATE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF AMOUNT (RS. ) 30.4.2003 ACRE CLUB MEMBERSHIP RS. 4 000/- 12.6.2003 HOTEL MEMBERSHIP RS. 7 000/- 06.2.2004 CLUB MAHINDRA HOLIDAY FOR SEASON RS.2 65 980/- 18.2.2004 NEW YEAR CARD MEMBERSHIP RS. 6 372/- TOTAL:- RS.2 83 852/- 23. IT IS TRUE THAT WHILE LISTING THE ABOVE AT PARA -7 OF PAGE-3 OF HIS ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INADVERTENTLY OMITTED THE FIG URE FOR CLUB MAHINDRA HOLIDAY MEMBERSHIP ALTHOUGH IN THE TOTAL HE HAS MENTIONED OF RS.2 83 852/-. 24. THE A.R. ARGUED BEFORE ME THAT THESE AMOUNTS HA D ALL BEEN SPENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS ONLY WITHOUT CATEGORICALLY JUST IFYING THE SAME. HOWEVER AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE DETAILS I AM OF THE V IEW THAT THE LISTED OUT EXPENDITURE HAD ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [9] BEEN OSTENSIBLY MADE FOR PERSONAL BENEFITS OF ONE P ARTNER MR. UDAY SHAH. FROM NO ANGLE THESE CAN BE CONSIDERED AS EXPENSES INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. THEREFORE I CONFIRM THE DISAL LOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. THE GROUND TAKEN IN THIS REGARD IS DISMISSED. 19. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS PERUSED THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION AS ALSO TH E FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE. 20. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON A CO-ORDINATE BENCHS DECISION IN THE CASE OF STERLITE INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD. VS ADDL. CIT 6 SOT 497 IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSITION THAT THE AMOUNT PAID FOR CORPORATE MEMB ERSHIP OF CLUB MAHINDRA IS TO BE ALLOWED AS DEDUCTION. HOWEVER AS IS THE CLEAR UNCO NTROVERTED FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE CLUB MEMBERSHIP IS IN THE NAME OF THE PARTNER OF THE FIRM AND EVEN THIS IS NOT ESTABLISHED THAT THE EXPENDITURE WAS OF THE ASSESSE E FIRM. THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS CITED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE OF THUS NO USE. IN ANY EVENT THER E IS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD TO ESTABLISH OR EVEN INDICATE THAT THE EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED FOR THE ASSESSEE FIRM OR THE ASSESSEE FIRM BENEFITED FROM THE SAME. WE THEREFORE SEE NO REAS ON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. WE APPROVE AND UPHOL D THE SAME. 21. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 22. NOW WE TAKE UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.5884/MUM ./2007 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 23. GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: - ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [10] 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING ONLY 50% ( AND DISALLOWING BALANCE 50%) OF EXPENSES AS THE EXPENSES WERE INCUR RED TO PROTECT THE BUSINESS INTEREST OF ASSESSEE FIRM. HENCE THEY ARE TO BE FULLY ALLOWED. 24. THE ISSUE ARISING OUT OF THE ABOVE GROUND IS MUTATI S MUTANDIS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND NO.1 DECIDED BY US IN THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 VIDE PARA4 WHEREIN WE H AVE DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). SIMILAR DIRECTIONS ARE ISSUED ON THIS GROUND ALSO. 25. THE REMAINING GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER:- 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISA LLOWANCE OF FOREIGN TOUR EXPENSES OF RS.49 454/- WITHOUT APPREC IATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER DETAILS OF BILLS OF RS.31 950/- AND CREDIT CARD STATEMENTS FOR RS.17 50 4/- RELATING TO THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 26. THE ISSUE ARISING OUT OF THE ABOVE GROUND IS MUTATI S MUTANDIS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND NO.2 DECIDED BY US IN THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 VIDE PARA8 WHEREIN WE H AVE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW FULL AMOUNT INCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF LOCAL TRAVEL FOOD AND HOTEL EXPENSES AND RE-COMPUTE THE INCOME IN THE LIGHT OF OUR AFORESAID DIRECTIONS AS CONTAINED IN PARA8 ABOVE. SIMILAR DIRECTIONS ARE I SSUED ON THIS GROUND ALSO. THUS THE ASSESSEE GETS RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [11] 27. IN THE RESULT ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS PARTLY ALLO WED IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 28. TO SUM UP ALL THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 30 TH DAY OF APRIL 2010. SD/- (D.K. AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 30 TH DAY OF APRIL 2010 COPIES OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT MUMBAI (4) CIT(A) MUMBAI (5) DR J BENCH (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ETC. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY MUMBAI BENCHES SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ITA NO.5122/MUM./2005 ITA NO.5884/MUM./2007 & ITA NO.5885/MUM./2007 M/S. SHABRO INTERNATIONAL [12] DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER