Judgment :- N.V. BALASUBRAMANIAN, J. The assessee is a textile mill manufacturing yarn. For the assessment year 1964-65, the relevant accounting year ended on March 31, 1964, the assessee-company returned an income of Rs. 2, 53, 368. The assessee, in the assessment proceedings, claimed a deduction towards bad debts in the name of Vijayakumar Cotton Press and another, totalling to Rs. 1, 37, 760. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the advances made to the parties were not for the business purposes of the assessee. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on appeal, confirmed the view of the Income-tax Officer. The Appellate Tribunal, on further appeal by the assessee, went into the matter and found that the claim of the assessee that the amount represented business debt and the loss of money returned should be treated as business debt cannot be accepted and in this view of the matter, the Tribunal held that the Income-tax Officer has correctly added the sum of Rs. 1, 37, 760, in the computation of the income of the assessee, disallowing the claim of the assessee that it is a bad debt. Pursuant to the directions of this court, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for our consideration : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances, of the case, the Tribunal is justified in not allowing the claim of the assessee for deduction of Rs. 1, 37, 760 or any part thereof either as bad debts or as trading loss ?" It is relevant to notice that with reference to the same advance in the case of the same assessee, the matter came up for consideration before this court earlier in Vijayakumar Mills Ltd. v. CIT and this court while upholding the findings of the Tribunal, held that there was positive evidence to show that the assessee's funds were diverted for the personal benefit of the managing director of the management and the amounts were not utilised for business purposes. In view of the earlier conclusion of this court with reference to the borrowings as well as advances, we are of the view, the Tribunal has come to the correct conclusion in holding that the borrowed funds were not utilised for the business purposes of the assessee. In view of the earlier conclusion of this court with reference to the borrowings as well as advances, we are of the view, the Tribunal has come to the correct conclusion in holding that the borrowed funds were not utilised for the business purposes of the assessee. Further, the finding of the Tribunal that the amounts did not represent business expenditure was arrived at on the basis of the material records. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has come to the correct conclusion in holding that the amounts are not liable to be deducted as business debts either as bad debts or trading losses as the advances were not made for the business purposes of the assessee. The Tribunal was correct in upholding the addition made by the Income-tax Officer of a sum of Rs. 1, 37, 360 as the assessee's income. The finding of the Tribunal was arrived at on the basis of the materials. Further, the earlier decision of this court in Vijayakumar Mills Ltd.'s case rendered with reference to the same advances would squarely apply to the facts of the case as well. Following the earlier decision of this court, we answer the question of law referred to us in the affirmative and against the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.