TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 530
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee company, who was also the Managing Director of a subsidiary company and who was later appointed as a Director of the assessee company itself? 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in having distinguished the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court reported in 1997 (226) ITR 220(Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kohinoor Paper Products) and relying on the decision of the Madras High Court in CIT v. R. K. K. R Steels (P) Ltd. [2002 (258) ITR 306]? 3. Whether the Tribunal was correct in having noticed the fact of no corresponding entry of credit in the subsidiary company, to disallow the claim, especially when the assesse was following the mercantile system of accounting and the liability accrued on the resolution of the Board of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on yet another decision of the Bombay High Court in Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Poona[(1978) 114 ITR 256]. 5. Kohinoor Paper Products(supra) was a case in which the firm consisting of three partners, who were closely related, sent one of the partners for higher studies in USA. The said partner who was sent for higher studies was also the son of one other partner. The expenditure incurred for his foreign study was claimed as business expenditure which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal however, held that the expenses incurred by the assessee company was one for the purpose of business of the assessee. The High Court concurred with the finding of the Tribunal. In Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. again, the ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the time of decision to send the M. D for higher studies, that on return he would be deputed and employed in the assessee company. 7. The Madras High Court has found that the assessee did not have a contention of a scheme of sending people abroad for training with a stipulation that they would be employed in the company as quid pro quo of the benefit of training imparted to them. The Madras High Court specifically noticed the fact that the Managing Director out of his love and affection had send his son abroad for higher studies which could not be claimed as a business expenditure of the company merely for a reason that he joined the company as a director. 8. We agree with the Tribunal that the present case is similar and identical to t....