:1: bgp bgp bgp IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL ORIGINAL ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX TAX TAX APPEAL NO.419 OF 2009 APPEAL NO.419 OF 2009 APPEAL NO.419 OF 2009 West Coast Containers Pvt.Ltd. ..Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer ..Respondent Mr.Sameer Dalal for Appellant. CORAM CORAM CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & :- V.C.DAGA & :- V.C.DAGA & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 27TH APRIL,2009 : 27TH APRIL,2009 : 27TH APRIL,2009 P.C. P.C. P.C. . Heard. . Perused petition. 2. Taking second question first, it relates to the disallowance of Rs.1,25,397/- being 50% of the travelling expenses incurred by the Company said to be for the business purposes by the Directors of the Company, who had gone abroad with his wife. The Tribunal, while disallowing 50% of the expenses has considered facts and circumstances and found that it was not wholly for the purposes of business. Partly, it was by way of pleasure trip. The finding is based on the appreciation of evidence. Hence, appeal is rejected as far as 2nd question is concerned. 3. So far as question No.3 is concerned, it can hardly be said to be a question of law. Hence, rejected. :2: 4. Question No.1 relates to disallowance of processing charges in the sum of Rs.5,15,057/-. No reasons are given by the Tribunal for making this disallowance. The Tribunal is expected to know that its order is subject to challenge before higher forum. It was expected to know that reasons introduce clarity in the order. The Tribunal shall tell the party why the decision is going against him, in all cases where the law gives a further right of appeal. On plainest consideration of justice, the Tribunal ought to have set forth the reasons, howsoever brief, in its order indicative of an application of its mind. The absence of reasons has rendered the order unsustainable. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside to the extent it relates to question No.3 and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer for consideration afresh in accordance with law following principles of natural justice. 5. Both parties are entitled to lead their respective evidence. All rival contentions so far as this particular question is concerned are kept open. 6. Appeal stands disposed of in terms of this order. No order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)