S N KAPOOR EXPORTS, JAIPUR V. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

ITA 67/JPR/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1951 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RUNI PAUL J DHK
• Keywords: Business expenditure
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;I QJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH B , JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE : SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 67/JP/2020 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S. S.N. KAPOOR EXPORTS KHAWAS JI KA BAGH, AMER ROAD JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ACIT CIRCLE - 5 JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AADFS 6912 J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.L. JAIN,ADVOCATE & SHRI ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA, ADVOCATE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. RUNI PAUL, JCIT-DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 18/03/2020 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 /03/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) -2, JAIPUR DATED 15-11-2019 FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2012-13. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS. 1. THAT THE LD.CIT (A), JAIPUR AS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPE NSES RS. 17,77,454 /- AS PER DETAILS AS UNDER WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND JUSTIFICATIO N . ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 2 S. NO NAME OF THE PERSON EXP. CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE % OF EXP. ALLOWED BY AO AMOUNT OF EXP. ALLOWED EXP. DIS ALLOWED BY AO % OF DIS ALLOWED BY AO 1. SURIENDER NATH KAPOOR 2178661 100% 2178661 NIL NIL 2. SUDESH KAPOOR 517763 45% 232993 284770 55 % 3. VIKRAM KAPOOR 7112789 100% 7112789 NIL NIL 4. BABITA KAPOOR 551526 40% 220610 330916 60% 5. RAHUL KAPOOR 395439 NIL NIL 395439 100% 6. VIVAAN KAPOOR 270012 NIL NIL 270012 100% 7. VARUN PARDAL 412335 20% 82467 329868 80% 8. KAVITA PARDAL 208061 20% 41612 166449 80% LOCAL TRAVEL EXPENSES 340945 100% 340945 NIL NIL TOTAL 11987531 --- 10210077 1777454 2. THAT THE LD. CIT (A), JAIPUR AS GROSSLY ERRED I N LAW AND FACTS IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCES OUT OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES WHICH IS PURELY AND EXCLUSIVELY RELATED TO BUSINESS. ALL FAMILY MEM BERS HAS WORKED IN THE FIRM. DUE TO SECRECY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF BUSINES S APPELLANT FIRM CANT TRUST ON EMPLOYEE OUTSIDE THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. REFER:- CIT VS SUNDHARAM CLAYTON LTD. AND DALMIA C EMENT (B.) LTD. (1999 ) 240 ITR 271. 3. COVERED MATTER :- THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A), JAIPUR AS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN NOT FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE ITAT JAIPUR IN APPEAL NO. 290/JP/2015 A.Y.2011-12 ON THE SAME ISSUE AND ON TH E SAME IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE. THE CIT(A) IS LEGALLY BOUND TO FO LLOW ORDER OF HIGHER AUTHORITIES. 4. THE LD. CIT(A), JAIPUR AS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCES OF RS.12,826/- (10%) FROM STAFF WELFARE MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES. 2.1 THE GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 ARE REGARDING FOREIGN TR AVELLING EXPENSES. ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 3 2.2 THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM AND ENGAGED IN THE MANUFACTURING AND TRADING OF CARPETS AND TEXTILE AR TICLES. THE ASSESSEE'S MAIN TURNOVER IS FROM EXPORTS OF THESE GOODS. THE A SSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 24-09-2012 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF R S. 1,09,55,950/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE AO INTER ALIA NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED RS. 1,19,87,531/- AS TRAVE LLING EXPENSES INCLUDING FOREIGN TRAVEL EXPENSES OF RS. 1,16,46,56 8/-. THE AO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE BREAKUP OF SUCH EXPENSES AN D ALSO PRODUCE VOUCHERS FOR VERIFICATION. FROM THE DETAILS PRODUCE D BY THE ASSESSEE, THE AO NOTED THAT SOME OF THE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED IN RESPECT OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING UNDERTAKEN BY FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE PART NERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO MADE DISALLOWANCE OF THE ENTIRE EXPENDITURE OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES IN RESPECT OF SHRI RAHU L KAPOOR AND MASTER VIVAAN KAPOOR SONS OF THE PARTNER SHRI SURENDER NAT H KAPOOR. THE AO ALSO MADE 20% DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF FOREIGN TR AVEL EXPENSES OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM. THE AO HAS COMP UTED THE RATIO OF SALARY TO THE QUANTUM OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSE S IN THE CASE OF THE PARTNERS AND THE SAME IS APPLIED IN THE CASE OF FOR EIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 4 OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM. THE ASSES SEE CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE AO BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT COULD NO T SUCCEED. 2.3 THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT TH E AO HAS MADE DISALLOWANCES IN THE RATIO OF SALARY TO FOREIGN TRA VELLING EXPENSES WHICH ARE HIGHLY ARBITRARY AND UNJUSTIFIED. THE LD.AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO COMPUTED THE RATIO OF SALARY PAID TO PARTNERS AND T HEIR FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES WHICH IS APPLIED TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE P ARTNERSHIP FIRM WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT PARTNERS ARE NOT AN EMPLOYEE AND THEREFORE, THEIR SALARY AND FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPE NSES CANNOT BE COMPARED WITH THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM. THE LD. AR FURTHER CONTENDED THAT HE HAS FURNISHED ALL THE DETAILS REGARDING FOR EIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE AO. THUS THE LD .AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT CORRECTNESS OF THE EXPENDITURE INCUR RED BY THE ASSESSEES PARTNERSHIP FIRM ON THE FOREIGN TOUR UNDERTAKEN BY THE PARTNERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE THUS SUBMITTED THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 13-06-2017 IN ITA NO. 290/JP/2015. THUS THE LD.AR OF THE ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 5 ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL (SUPRA). 2.4 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THA T THE AO HAS GIVEN THE FINDING OF FACTS THAT FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE PAR TNERS WHO HAVE GONE ON FOREIGN TOUR ALONWITH THE PARTNERS HAVE NOT INCURRE D THE EXPENSES FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES OF THE ASSESSEES PARTNERSHIP FIR M. AS REGARDS THE EMPLOYEES OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM, SINCE THESE EMPL OYEES ARE ALSO THE FAMILY MEMBERS AND RELATIVES OF THE PARTNERS, THERE FORE, THE AO BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(2) OF THE I .T. ACT, 1961 HAS MADE PROPORTIONATE DISALLOWANCE WHICH WAS FOUND TO BE EX CESSIVE. THE LD. DR FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IT IS A CASE OF FAMILY OF PA RTNERSHIP FIRM AND ENTIRE FAMILIES OF THE PARTNERS HAVE UNDERTAKEN FOREIGN TO UR. ALL THE EXPENDITURE IS CLAIMED AS BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. THEREFORE, ONLY THE PROPORTIONATE EXPENDITURE WHICH IS FOUND TO BE INCURRED FOR THE P URPOSE OF BUSINESS OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM CAN BE ALLOWED. THE LD. DR HAS VEHEMENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR FOREIGN TOUR OF TWO CHILDREN OF THE PARTNER AND ONE OF THEM IS MINOR CANNOT BE A LLOWED AS EXPENDITURE INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OF THE ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 6 ASSESSEES PARTNERSHIP FIRM. THE LD. DR THUS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 2.5 WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WEL L AS RELEVANT MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE DISPUTE BEFORE U S IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES INCURRE D BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF FOREIGN VISIT UNDERTAKEN BY THE EMPLOYEE S OF THE ASSESSEES PARTNERSHIP FIRM AS WELL AS FOREIGN VISIT OF THE CH ILDREN OF THE PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. SO FAR AS THE EMPLOYEES OF THE A SSESSEES PARTNERSHIP FIRM ARE CONCERNED, ONCE THE AO HAS ACCEPTED THAT T HE FOREIGN VISIT UNDERTAKEN BY THE EMPLOYEES ARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSESSEES PARTNERSHIP FIRM THEN THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO IN PROPOR TION TO THE SALARY AND TRAVELLING EXPENSES OF THE PARTNER IS HIGHLY UN JUSTIFIED. THERE IS NO DIRECT OR PROXIMATE RELATION BETWEEN THE SALARY OF THE EMPLOYEES AND ACTUAL EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON FOREIGN TOUR UNDERTA KEN BY THE EMPLOYEES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. I T IS NOT A PERQUISITE GIVEN TO THE EMPLOYEES BUT IT WAS A FOREIGN TOUR OF THE EMPLOYEES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND THEREF ORE, THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS FOREIGN TOUR OF TH E EMPLOYEES UNDERTAKEN BY THEM FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS IS A N ALLOWABLE ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 7 EXPENDITURE. THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 13-06-2017 HAS CONSID ERED THIS ISSUE IN PARA 2.4 AS UNDER:- 2.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUS ED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED EXPENSES OF RS. 91,69,981/ - AS FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES. THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF AS SESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MADE THE DISALLOWANCES OF RS. 26,02,28 2/- ON THE BASIS OF PERCENTAGE OF SALARY OF EMPLOYEE AND PARTNER BESIDE S CHILDREN OF THE PARTNER. IN FIRST APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIR MED THE DISALLOWANCES OF EXPENSES INCURRED DURING FOREIGN TRIP ON THE CHI LDREN AND SUSTAINED 20% DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES INCURRED DURING FOREIG N TRIP OF THE EMPLOYEE. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS TAKEN HIS EMPLOYEES ON FOREIGN TRIP FOR OFFICIAL PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE EMPLOYEES INCURRED THE EXPENSES. IT IS ALSO NOT UND ERSTOOD AS TO HOW THE EXPENSES ARE SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) RELATI NG TO DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES AS IN FOREIGN TRIP THE EXPENSES LIKE AI R TICKETS, HOTELS ETC. ARE COMMONLY SPENT AND INCURRED WHICH THE PARTNER O F THE FIRM SPENDS. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FLATLY SU STAINED THE ADDITION @ 20% WITHOUT GIVING ANY COGENT REASONS WHICH IS NOT JUSTIFIED. IN THIS SITUATION, WE DIRECT TO ALLOW THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,39,671/- ( 2,29,948 + RS. 2,53,982 + RS. 55,801). AS REGARDS THE DISA LLOWANCE OF EXPENSES OF RS. 2,04,215/- INCURRED ON MINOR CHILD REN OF THE ASSESSEE , IT IS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS WRITTEN SUB MISSION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AT PAGE 7 OF HIS ORDER SUBMITTED AS UNDER:- FURTHER VIVAN IS MINOR CHILDREN AND THEY CANNOT LIVE ALONE AT HIM AT HOME AND UNDER COMPULSION THEY HAD TO TAKE W ITH THEM AND IT WAS NECESSARY TO KEEP WITH HIM FOR BETTER BUSINESS ACTIVITIES OTHERWISE THEY COULD NOT HAVE PAID ATTENTION ON BUSINESS AND THEIR MIND COULD BE DIVERTED. THE AO NOWHERE STATED THAT THIS IS NOT TH E BUSINESS TOUR RATHER ADMITTED. IF SO, THEN HOW THE AO CAN MAKE PA RTLY DISALLOWANCE TREATING PART OF PERSONAL. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION TH E SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE . IT IS ALSO PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT WHE N THE PARTNER ALONGWITH HIS FAMILY IS GOING ON OFFICIAL FOREIGN TRIP THEN IT WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR HIM TO LEAVE HIS MINOR CHILDREN ALONE AND UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WILL ALSO BE DIFFICULT TO PUT ATT ENTION FOR GROWTH OF THE BUSINESS DURING FOREIGN TRIP AS HIS MINOR CHILDREN IS AWAY FROM THE PARENTS AND THE OBJECT TO PONDER ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS IS ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 8 DEFEATED. HENCE, IT IS NOT JUSTIFIED ON THE PART OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION. IN THIS SITUATION, WE DIRE CT TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,04,215/-. FURTHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALS O CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 7,80,734/- IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAH UL KAPOOR IN FIRST APPEAL. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE AT PAGE 7 OF T HE LD. CIT(A) ORDER ON THIS ISSUE PRAYED FOR DELETION OF ADDITION AS U NDER:- THE RAHUL KAPOOR ALTHOUGH NOT GETTING THE SALARY OF THE FIRM BUT HE WAS CLOSELY ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND INDIRECTLY SUPPORTING THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. HE I S MASTER MIND IN DESIGNING. IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. DELHI PRESS SAMAC HAR PATRA (P) LTD. (1990) 32 ITD 650, HELD THAT BUSINESS EXPENDITURE- ALLOWABILITY- FOREIGN TRAVEL EXPENSES VISIT TO ENGLAND BY A PER SON WHO WAS NOT A DIRECTOR OR EMPLOYEE OF THE COMPANY BUT A RELATION OF THE DIRECTORS- THE PERSONAL WAS AN EXPERT IN PUBLISHING- VISIT FOR THE PURPOSE WAS SOLVING OF CERTAIN PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED BY THE ASSESSEE WIT H A PRESS IMPORTED FROM ENGLAND ALLOWABLE. AND A PERSON CAN TAKE HELP OR ASSISTANCE OTHER PER SON FOR A SHORT PERIOD TO BOOST HIS BUSINESS. FOR THAT IN LAW THERE IS NO DENIAL. IT IS NOTED FROM THE RECORDS THAT THE MAJOR SON OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI RAHUL KAPOOR ALSO WENT TO THE FOREIGN TRIP ALONGWIT H THE PARENTS I.E. PARTNER OF THE COMPANY. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT SHRI RAHUL KAPOOR IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUSINESS OF ASSESSEE WITHOUT A NY SALARY. HE IS SUPPORTING THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AS HE HAD EXPER TISE IN DESIGNING. IT IS ALSO RELEVANT TO MENTION THAT EVERY FAMILY MEMBER O F PARTNER OF FIRM ASSOCIATES WITH THE BUSINESS GROWTH OF THE FIRM BY UTILIZING HIS/ HER TALENT WITHOUT RECEIVING ANY SALARY. THEREFORE, TH E ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN HIS SON ON FOREIGN TRIP TO PROMOTE THE BUSINESS OF FIRM BY UTILIZING HIS EXPERTISE IN DESIGNING. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT JUSTIF IED TO SUSTAIN THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES OF RS. 7,80,734/- ON HIS FOREIGN TRIP. IN SUCH SITUATION, WE DIRECT TO DELETE THE EXPENSE OF RS. 7,80,734/-. CONCLUSIVELY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOU NT OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING EXPENSES IN RESPECT OF EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM IS DELETED. 2.5.1 AS REGARDS THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN RESPEC T OF FOREIGN TRAVELLING OF CHILDREN NAMELY SHRI RAHUL KAPOOR AND MASTER VIV AAN KAPOOR OF THE ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 9 PARTNER OF ASSESSEE FIRM, THESE ARE NOT EMPLOYEES O F ASSESSEE'S PARTNERSHIP FIRM AND EVEN ONE OF THEM I.E. MASTER VIVAAN KAPOOR IS STILL A MINOR WHO CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS THE EMPLOYEE OF THE PARTNER SHIP FIRM OF THE ASSESSEE. AS REGARDS, THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN R ESPECT OF FOREIGN TOUR OF SHRI RAHOOL KAPOOR WHO WAS FOUND TO BE ASSISTING IN THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE'S PARTNERSHIP FIRM, BEING A QUALIFIED AND EXPERT IN DESIGNING, THE SAME WAS ALLOWED BY THIS TRIBUNAL FOR THE A.Y. 2011 -12. THERE IS NO DISPUTE IF THE SON IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE PARTNERSHIP FIRM AND ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES BY PROVIDING HIS EXPERTISE AND SERVICES OF DESIGNING I N THE BUSINESS OF ASSESSEE THEN THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN FOREIGN T OUR OF THE SON OF THE PARTNER IS AN ALLOWABLE BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. HOWEV ER, THIS FACT HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED BY ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND T HEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE AO TO VERIFY THIS FACT AND IF SHRI RAHOOL KAPO OR IS FOUND TO BE ASSISTING IN THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND ALSO PROVIDING THE SERVICES OF DESIGNING THEN THE CLAIM OF THE ASS ESSEE SHALL BE ALLOWED BY FOLLOWING OUR EARLIER ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 10 2.5.2 AS REGARDS THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON FOREIG N TOUR OF MASTER VIVAAN KAPOOR, A MINOR SON OF THE PARTNER, THOUGH T HE TRIBUNAL HAS ALLOWED THIS EXPENDITURE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 11-12, HOWEVER, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT SAID EXPENDITURE CA NNOT BE CONSIDERED AS INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE BUSINESS PU RPOSES OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. THERE MAY BE AN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 BUT IT CANNOT BE A ROUTINE MATTER OF T AKING THE SON ON FOREIGN VISIT. EVEN OTHERWISE THE BUSINESS AFFAIRS OF THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM CANNOT BE MIXED WITH THE PERSONAL OR FAMILY AFFAIRS. THE ISSUE OF TAKING THE MINOR ON FOREIGN VISIT IS PUREL Y A PERSONAL/ FAMILY AFFAIR OF THE PARTNER AND THEREFORE, THE EXPENDITUR E INCURRED ON THE FOREIGN VISIT OF THE MINOR SON CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS REGULAR BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. THEREFORE, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT THAT SAID EXPEN DITURE WAS ALLOWED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 BY THE TRIBUNAL, IT CAN NOT BE A PERPETUAL ROUTINE EXPENDITURE. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE OF FOREIGN TOUR EXPENDITURE IN RESPECT OF MASTER VIVAAN KAPOOR IS C ONFIRMED. 3.0 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRESSED THE GROUND NO. 4 DUE TO SMALLNESS OF THE AM OUNT. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED BEING NOT PRESSED. ITA NO.67 /JP/2020 M/S. S.N.KAPOOR EXPORTS VS ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, JAIPUR 11 4.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED.. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 /03/202 0. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO FOT; IKY JKO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 20/03/ 2020 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S. S.N. KAPOOR EXPORTS, JAIPUR 2 IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE 5, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY ) @ CIT(A), 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO 67/JP/2020) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR