https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449953 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of assessee regarding FBT on business promotion expenses. AO treated advertisement and business promotion expenses as fringe benefits under sections 115WB(2)(d) and 115WB(2)(o), claiming they were provided to employees. Assessee contended expenses were incurred on doctors, not employees. ITAT found revenue accepted expenses were for doctors' benefit through gifts and travel facilities for product promotion. Following Bombay HC precedent in Pr.CIT v/s Aristo Pharmaceuticals, ITAT held FBT requires employer-employee relationship as sine qua non. Since no evidence showed doctors were assessee's employees, expenses could not constitute fringe benefits. Addition deleted, assessee's grounds allowed. en-us Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Feb 2024 10:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449953 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of assessee regarding FBT on business promotion expenses. AO treated advertisement and business promotion expenses as fringe benefits under sections 115WB(2)(d) and 115WB(2)(o), claiming they were provided to employees. Assessee contended expenses were incurred on doctors, not employees. ITAT found revenue accepted expenses were for doctors' benefit through gifts and travel facilities for product promotion. Following Bombay HC precedent in Pr.CIT v/s Aristo Pharmaceuticals, ITAT held FBT requires employer-employee relationship as sine qua non. Since no evidence showed doctors were assessee's employees, expenses could not constitute fringe benefits. Addition deleted, assessee's grounds allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449953