TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (12) TMI 96
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. 2551/ Mds/77-78 is an appeal by the Revenue. Both the appeals relate to the asst. yr. 1974-75. 2. We first take up the appeal of the assessee. The assessee had certain land and building situated at 199, Thiruvothiyur High Road, Tondiarpet, Madras. This was a business asset and the sale was effected on 15th April, 1972 for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000 to one M/s. A.R. Ahamed & Co., a partnershi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an land tax was payable by the assessee in respect of the land owned by it in the capacity of an owner-cum-trader. The urban land tax relates to a period when the assessee held the asset as a business asset. The demand became crystalised only in the accounting period now under consideration. Though the actual payment was made by M/s. Ahamed & Co., the payment of behalf of the assessee represented ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....artake of the nature of entertainment expenditure following the decisions of the Gujarat High Court in CIT Gujarat vs. Patel Brothers & Co. Ltd. (2) Hence we do no agree with the learned Departmental Representative who relying on the decision of the Kerala High Court in CIT Kerala vs. Veeriah Reddiar (3), submitted that the expenditure should not be allowed as a deduction. The appeal of the Depart....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urchase of buses, i.e., in defending suits, was an admissible deduction as per the decision of the Madras High Court in CIT vs. Raman and Raman Ltd (4). Inn our view, the assessee being a motor transport operator the purchase and sale of buses have really to take place during the course of the business of the assessee. The expenditure was incurred by the assessee in connection with ensuring that t....