Deduction claim requires supporting evidence beyond a board resolution; prejudice complaint fails when the issue was already noticed.

A complaint of prejudice failed because the parties had already been fully put to notice of the question under consideration, so the absence of a separately framed question of law did not, by itself, show prejudice. A deduction claim was also rejected where the assessee produced only a board resolution and no further material to substantiate the expenditure. The Court accepted the High Court's conclusion on that evidentiary deficiency and confined its confirmation of the findings to the stated assessment years, leaving issues relating to later years open.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appellant could contend prejudice on the ground that no specific question of law was framed by the High Court. (ii) Whether the claim for deduction could be disallowed where, apart from the board resolution, no material was produced in support of the expense claim.

Issue (i): Whether the appellant could contend prejudice on the ground that no specific question of law was framed by the High Court.

Analysis: The record showed that the appellant and counsel had been fully put to notice about the question agitated before the High Court. In those circumstances, the absence of a separately framed question of law did not establish prejudice.

Conclusion: The contention of prejudice was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the claim for deduction could be disallowed where, apart from the board resolution, no material was produced in support of the expense claim.

Analysis: The only material placed on record was the board resolution. No further evidence was produced to substantiate the claim for deduction, and the High Court's conclusion on that basis was accepted.

Conclusion: The disallowance was upheld and the appellant's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned judgment was affirmed, but the confirmation of the High Court's findings was confined to Assessment Years 1990-1991, 1991-1992 and 1992-1993, while issues relating to subsequent assessment years were left open.

Ratio Decidendi: A deduction claim may be rejected where the assessee fails to produce material beyond a board resolution to support the expenditure, and a complaint of prejudice will not succeed when the party was already put to notice of the issue under consideration.

---