High Court Of Madras
CIT vs. T.T. Krishnamachary & Co.
Asst. Year 1975-76
R. Jayasimha Babu & K. Gnanaprakasam, JJ.
Tax Case No. 947 of 1990
11th June, 2001
T. Ravikumar, for the Revenue : P.P.S. Janardhana Raja, for the Assessee
R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. :
Sec. 40A(2)(a) of the IT Act, 1961, reads thus : “Where the assessee incurs any expenditure in respect of which payment has been or is to be made to any person referred to in cl. (b) of this sub-section, and the AO is of opinion that such expenditure is excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value of the goods, services or facilities for which the payment is made or the legitimate needs of the business or profession of the assessee or the benefit derived by or accruing to him therefrom, so much of the expenditure as is so considered by him to be excessive or unreasonable shall not be allowed as a deduction.” The completed assessment of the assessee, a partnership firm carrying on manufacturing and marketing of goods wholesale, was reopened by the ITO for the asst. yr. 1975-76 to consider the applicability of s. 40A(2)(a) of the Act in respect of purchase of gripe-water made by it from Tamil Nadu Printers Pvt. Ltd., which company is owned by the partners of the firm. The officer made an addition of Rs. 5,80,580 as excessive price paid by the assessee to the said company. On appeal, that addition was deleted by the CIT after considering the fact that another company to which it sold gripe-water had bought it at the increased price, and the price at which Tamil Nadu Printers sold the item could not be regarded as unduly high. That finding of the CIT was affirmed by the Tribunal which went in detail into all the relevant facts. The question raised is essentially a question of fact. The CIT, as also the Tribunal have as a matter of fact found that the expenditure incurred by the assessee on the purchase of gripe-water was neither excessive nor unreasonable having regard to the fair market value of the goods for which the payment was made by the assessee. It is not the province of this Court to reappraise all the facts which had been thoroughly examined by the CIT and the Tribunal who have, after such examination formed their opinion based on the facts as ascertained by them. The facts as found by them do warrant the conclusion that they reached. The question referred to us, viz., “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had valid materials to hold that the provisions of s. 40A(2)(a) could not apply in regard to the purchase made from Tamil Nadu Printers (P) Ltd. and deleting the addition of Rs. 5,80,580?” is answered in favour of the assessee, and against the Revenue.
[Citation : 256 ITR 82]