Expenditure on studies abroad of bona fide employee of assessee-company can

IT : Expenditure on studies abroad of bona fide employee of assessee-company can't be disallowed merely because he was son of ex-director
Facts
• Respondent-assessee was engaged in the business of printing and distribution of newspapers and magazines. The assessee's claim in respect of the expenses made on foreign travelling and education of Shri Siddharth Chhajlani (son of Ex-director) was disallowed and added to the income of the assessee by the Assessing Officer, and the same was affirmed in appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, ITAT allowed assessee's appeal and allowed deduction of the said expenditure. Hence, this present appeal by revenue to HC.
Held
(A) The Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee based on the following findings:
• Shri Siddharth Chhajlani was an employee of the assessee working as Assistant Manager (Printing).
• He was sent by the assessee to have advanced knowledge of latest printing technology which was directly related with the business of the assessee-company.
• Shri Siddharth Chhajlani was a regular employee of the assessee-company since financial year 2003-04 as evidenced by the salary certificate along with the deduction and payment to Employee's Provident Fund.
• Shri Siddharth Chhajlani was sent for higher studies in printing technology, which is the main field of working of the assessee-company and a bond was got executed to ensure that he will work for at least 5 years after return to India. A guarantee in this regard was also taken from his parents.
• Shri Siddharth Chhajlani was in employment with the company not only before going but even during the period he was undertaking studies in printing technology at London and also on his return from London.
• Completion of the advanced diploma in Information Technology (Printing) from College of Applied Sciences, London was evidenced by relevant certificated.
• The expenditure in question was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of the assessee-company.
(B)The finding of the Tribunal that the said expenditure was incurred by the assessee wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of the assessee-company is duly supported by the material on record. The Tribunal has assigned due reasons while arriving at the said finding. Learned counsel for Revenue could not point out any error in the finding so arrived at by the Tribunal.
(C)Merely because Shri Siddharth Chhajlani was son of an ex-director of the company, the same would not furnish a ground for disallowing the said expenditure, when on facts the other conditions are satisfied in this regard.
• In the result, Tribunal's order calls for no interference. - [2012] 23 taxmann.com 422 (Madhya Pradesh)