VITHAL OVERSEAS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessee has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') against the order of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, dated 6.6.2008, passed in ITA No. 81(ASR)/2008 for the assessment year 2004 -05, proposing to raise four substantial questions of law, out of which learned Counsel for the appellant pressed only question Nos. 1 and 2, which are as under:

(2.) WHETHER the Tribunal had erred in law and exceeded its jurisdiction by not confining itself to the matter in issue in the appeal before it and deciding the appeal before it in favour of the revenue/department on grounds not in controversy?

(3.) WE are unable to hold that the questions raised are substantial questions of law. Whether evidence is to be allowed, is a matter of discretion depending upon a fact situation. In the present case, the issue dealt with was assessee's claim for deduction of amount towards expenses incurred by Sunil Kumar Malhotra on foreign travel. The assessee had all the opportunity before the Assesing Officer to produce evidence that Sunil Kumar Malhotra was representing it and expenditure was genuinely incurred for business purpose. No doubt, the CIT(A) accepted the plea of the assessee, the Tribunal was entitled to go into the correctness of the said finding and take its own view by appreciation of evidence. There was no obligation on the part of the Tribunal to allow further evidence as no new point was raised. The question of issue being the genuineness of the expenses incurred for business purpose on visit of Sunil Kumar Malhotra, representing the assessee, the judgments relied upon are distinguishable.