JUDGMENT
Sethuraman, J.
1. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Tamil Nadu-III, Madras, has applied for a direction to the Tribunal in each of these two petitions for reference of the following question:
” Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the expenses incurred by the assessee towards pooja and bakshish should be allowed as business expenses or welfare expenses of the staff ? ”
2. The facts are in a short compass. The assessment years under consideration are 1968-69 and 1969-70. The assessee claimed Rs. 1,751 and Rs. 3,250 as miscellaneous expenses. These had been classified as pooja expenses and also expenses for bakshish and presentation. The ITO disallowed the claim and the said disallowance was confirmed by the AAC on appeal. On further appeal, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals in part. In para. 12 of its order, the Tribunal pointed out that these expenses were incurred for the poojas, etc., performed by the workers and that they should form part of the welfare expenses. It also pointed out that, similarly, expenses on bakshish and presentation were found to have been incurred in respect of the workers alone. Hence, the Tribunal did not find any reason for the disallowance of these claims. It is this conclusion of the Tribunal that is now sought to be questioned.
3. Having regard to the finding of the Tribunal that these expenses have been incurred only in respect of the workers, it is clear that the expenses have been rightly held to be ones incurred for the welfare of the workers. The conclusion of the Tribunal is based on the particular facts and, therefore, no question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. The petitions are, accordingly, dismissed with costs. Counsel’s fee Rs. 250 (Rupees two hundred and fifty only), one set.