TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (9) TMI 510
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1961 (for short, "the Act") against the order dated July 6, 2007 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "B", New Delhi in I. T. A. No. 5365(Del)/2004 for the assessment year 2001-02, pro-posing to raise the following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assessing Officer as capital, the benefit of which was of enduring nature?" (iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is erred in deleting the disallowance made under section 80HHC by reducing the business profits by 90 per cent. of duty draw back, interest income, miscellaneous income and provisions made in earlier years written back?" 2.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was held that the expenses claimed were not for personal use but were for official use. The view of the Tribunal for the earlier assessment year in the case of the assessee was followed. The finding of the Tribunal for the earlier assessment year was upheld by this court vide order dated March 5, 2009 in I. T. A. No. 38 of 2008 CIT v. Porrits and Spencer (Asia) Ltd. 5. As regards question No. (i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enditure. 7. As regards question No. (iv), the Tribunal, following its order in the case of the assessee for the earlier assessment year, held that the expenses were not covered by Explanation (baa). Learned counsel for the assessee points out that the Revenue preferred I. T. A. No. 539 of 2006 but the said finding was not questioned. The tax effect involved on this ground is Rs. 16,628 only. 8.....