IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
 . 
 . 
   ITA 74/2012  
 . 
 . 
 . 
 LEADING LINE MERCHAND TRADERS 
 . 
 PVT LTD            ..... Appellant 
 . 
 Through Mr. Prakash Chand Yadav, Adv. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 versus 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 CIT            ..... Respondent 
 . 
 Through Mr. Kiran Babu, sr. standing counsel 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 CORAM: 
 . 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA 
 . 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 O R D E R 
 . 
      08.02.2012 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 CM 1505/2012 
 . 
 Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. 
 . 
 Application is disposed of. 
 . 
 CM 1504/2012 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 This is an application for condonation of delay in filing of the 
 appeal.  For the reasons stated in the application the delay is condoned. 
 . 
 Application is disposed of. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 ITA 74/2012 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 The appellant, Leading Line Merchant Traders (P) Ltd., supplies 
 wood pulp in the form of subabul and eucalyptus plant. 
 . 
 2. It is submitted that the entire supply by the appellant is to 
 Ballarpur Industries Ltd. 
 . 
 3. In the return for the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee had 
 claimed expenses of Rs.4,66,466/- as allowable under Section 37 of the 
 Income Tax Act, 1961 (?Act?, for short) on account of foreign travel 
 undertaken by the Directors of Ballarpur Industries Ltd.  The Assessing 
 Officer asked for justification why the expenditure incurred should be 
 allowed under Section 37 of the Act.  It may be noticed here that the 
 total profit and gains from business as declared by the appellant- 
 assessee was Rs.4,24,670/-. 
 . 
 4. Before the Assessing Officer, the appellant submitted as under: 
 . 
 ?The assessee is carrying business of supply of raw plants used and in 
 the manufacturing of paper industries.  The assesses is making its entire 
 supply to M/s. Ballapur Industries Ltd.  The foreign travel expenses 
 relate to foreign travel conducted by certain executives of Ballarpur 
 Industries Limited (Bilt) to discuss the supply of these materials.  The 
 assessee company has already filed a copy of bills of the travel agent. 
 The payment was made by account payee cheque and a copy of bank statement 
 has also been filed.  We have been informed that executive of the company 
 (Bilt) who was looking after the above dealings, left the said company 
 . 
 more than one year back and the documents relevant to details of the business negotiated during that visit is not traceable.  It is common 
 business practice to arrange such meetings and the assessee company 
 therefore arranged the tickets for the officials of bilt to discuss the 
 business transaction relating to them.? 
 . 
 The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had not put forward any 
 evidence to show that the expenditure incurred on foreign travel of 
 Directors of Ballarpur Industries Ltd. had anything  to do with the 
 business activity undertaken by the appellant.  It was an expenditure of 
 personal nature and not in nature of business. 
 . 
 5. The CIT (Appeals) confirmed the said addition and has recorded as 
 under : 
 . 
 ?5.2 I have carefully considered the submissions made on behalf of the 
 appellant, the findings of the Assessing Officer in the assessment order 
 and the facts on record.  The findings of the A.O. are that the assessee 
 has failed to furnish details of foreign travel expenses and satisfactory 
 explanation in regard to the above expenses from the point of commercial 
 expediency.  The appellant has also not been able to explain during the 
 appellate proceedings also as to how and why the foreign travel expenses 
 were helpful in promoting its business.  The appellant had no furnished 
 any report as to the achievements and accomplishments in foreign 
 countries as a result of the tours undertaken by them and the benefit 
 that the business of the company acquired there from.  The appellant had 
 not led any evidence that visit of the Director of M/s Ballarpur 
 Industries Ltd. Was necessary to facilitate negotiations with foreign 
 parties.  There was no evidence of any negotiations which may have taken 
 place.  There was also no evidence that the Director had special aptitude 
 with regard to business of the assessee nor there was any evidence to 
 show that he was representative of the assessee.  In order to claim a 
 deduction on account of expenditure for purposes of business the on us 
 (sic) lies on the assessee to prove that the expenditure was incurred for 
 the purposes of business and was not of a capital nature.  Merely because 
 a businessman goes out to the foreign country does not necessarily lead 
 to the conclusion that the expenditure was of a revenue nature.  In order 
 that an expenditure should qualify for deduction as contemplated by 
 section 37(1), one of the requirements of the provision is that the 
 expenditure must have been laid out wholly and exclusively for the 
 purpose of the business.  It cannot be disputed that before an assessee 
 can become entitled to an allowance under that provision, he must satisfy 
 the Assessing Officer of the purpose for which the amount is spent.  It 
 is true that the taxing authorities are not entitled to go into the 
 reasonableness of the expenses, but they are certainly entitled to be 
 satisfied as to the commercial necessity of expending that amount.  The 
 question will always be as to the nature of the relation between the 
 expenditure and he business, whether the benefit is remote or near, 
 prospective or immediate, imaginary or real and so forth.  The capacity 
 in which the assessee spends will also be relevant.  In the instant case, 
 the assessee did not furnish any material to the Assessing Officer to 
 arrive at the conclusion favouring the assessee.  The A.O. therefore, 
 exercised his judgment and discretion which cannot be said to the 
 . 
 arbitrary or unreasonable.  In view of the aforesaid, I have no hesitation in holding that the action of the A.O. in disallowing 
 Rs.4,66,466/- out of the foreign travel expenses is justified.  As a 
 result, the addition of Rs.4,66,46/- made out of foreign travel expenses 
 is confirmed and of appeal No.2 is dismissed.? 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 6. On further appeal, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has confirmed 
 the said addition approving the findings recorded by the CIT(Appeals). 
 . 
 7. Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that the order passed by the 
 tribunal is perverse.  He submits that the assessee had filed before the 
 Assessing Officer details of payment and copy of bills/invoices issued by 
 the travel agent.  It is not possible to accept the contention of the 
 appellant.  Mere payment to the travel agent does not establish that the 
 expenditure in question was incurred wholly and exclusively for the 
 purpose of business.  The findings of the CIT(Appeals) are elaborate and 
 specific.  The three authorities have given concurrent findings that the 
 appellant-assessee was not able to justify or show that the expenditure 
 was incurred for business purpose. 
 . 
 8. The appellant-assessee failed and did not produce evidence that the 
 expenditure on foreign trips of a third person i.e. Directors of 
 Ballarpur Industries Ltd. was incurred as incidental to their trade, for 
 the purpose of keeping the trade going on and making it pay and not in 
 any other capacity than that of a trader. [CIT Vs. Delhi Sale Deposit Co. 
 Ltd. (1982) 133 ITR 756 (SC)] 
 . 
 9. No substantial question of law arises in the present appeal. 
 Appeal is dismissed.  No costs. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 SANJIV KHANNA, J 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 R.V.EASWAR, J 
 . 
 FEBRUARY 08, 2012 
 . 
 vld 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 $ 22 to 25 
 . 
 . 
 .