IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 ITA.No. 200 of 2000() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.5.2000 IN ITA.100/1995 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT : ----------------- M/S. KERALA TRANSPORT CO., CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.C.KOCHUNNY NAIR SRI.DALE P.KURIEN RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SC FOR IT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. Ramachandran Nair & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.A.NO.200 of 2000 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. This is an appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal challenging various disallowances of expenditure made in the assessment for the year 1990-91, sustained by the Tribunal. 2. We heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. We do not think any substantial question of law arises from the Tribunal's order, because the findings on the items of disallowances are essentially on facts. The first item of disallowance challenged is entertainment disallowance. We are of the view that the Tribunal rightly treated the expenditure incurred for giving gifts in the form of liquor, cashew, etc. as entertainment expenditure. Consequently, disallowance has to be made in excess of the limit provided under Section 37(2A) of the Act. The appellant got the allowance to the expenditure permissible under the Act and disallowance is only in excess of the limit provided. Therefore, there is no ground to interfere with the same. So far ITA 200/2000 -2- as the disallowance of travelling expenses are concerned, we find that the Tribunal found it excessive and specific cases are pointed out to sustain the disallowance. Similarly, the other item of disallowance is payments made by the appellant to police and check post authorities which are actually in the nature of bribe. As it is against public policy, the Tribunal rightly disallowed the same. The next item of disallowance challenged is motor transport expenses. We find, disallowance is only to the extent provided under the Act. Since the findings are only based on facts, no substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appeal is therefore dismissed as devoid of any merit. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ ITA 200/2000 -3- C.N. Ramachandran Nair & & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.A. No.200 of 2000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 10th January, 2008.