1996 (12) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The only ground raised is against confirming the disallowance made out of car expenses. This is the case of a company. In the asst. yr. 1984-85. The AO made a disallowance of Rs. 9,910 being 20 per cent of the car expenses as in the past. 20 per cent of the depreciation was also disallowed at Rs. 990. Similarly, in the asst. yr. 1985-86 the AO made a disallowance of car expenses at Rs. 8,33....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ould take is to assess the value of such perquisite in the hands of the directors. In support, he has cited the Tribunal decision in the case of Pritam Hotel Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (1983) 17 TTJ (Bom) 550 wherein for similar reasons the Tribunal held the view that although any expenditure relating to personal use may constitute perquisite in the hands of directors it will be an allowable expenditure as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e facts and Tribunal decisions on the issue. 5. We have considered the facts and rival submissions. It is evident from the facts given that this is the case of a company and the company owned a car for use of its directors for business purposes. We do not have before us the orders of the earlier year wherein part of the car expenses were disallowed by the Revenue and in the absence thereof we a....