Commissioner of Income Tax vs T.T. Krishnamachary and Co.

R. Jayasimha Babu, J.—Section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax 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 Clause (b) of this

subsection, and the Assessing Officer 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 Income Tax Officer for the assessment year 1975-76 to consider the applicability of Section 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 Commissioner 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 Commissioner was affirmed by the Tribunal which went in detail into

all the relevant facts.

The question raised is essentially a question of fact.

The Commissioner, 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 Commissioner 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 Appellate Tribunal had valid materials to hold that the provisions of Section

40A(2)(a) could not apply in regard to the purchase made from Tamil Nadu Printers (P.) Limited and deleting the addition of Rs. 5,80,580 ?

is answered in favour of the assessee, and against the Revenue.