TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 1161
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... disallowance of advertisement and marketing expenditure. The revenue has also taken ground with regard to violation of Rule 46A. 3. In the Cross objection, the assessee has taken ground of validity of reopening u/s 147. 4. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. 5. Facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing and trading of pharmaceutical products. On the basis of search effected u/s 132 on M/s Genom Biotech Pvt Ltd (GBPL), completed assessment was reopened by issue of notice u/s 143(2) r.w.s. 147 and the AO disallowed expenditure incurred on advertisement on the basis of report of DDIT (Inv.). 6. By impugned order the CIT(A) deleted disallowance after having a following observation: "7.2 Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The same verified by the banker who permitted the remittance. (b) In the course of original assessment proceedings your appellant produced the following documents before the AO for his verification: (1) Copy of agreement with distributor; (2) Statement of advertisement and marketing expenses showing details of bills, name of the distributors, amount and date of payment; (3) Invoice of distributor showing nature of advertisement expenses, (4) Supporting materials such as cutting of newspaper, cutting of magazine, photo of auto transport, etc. (5) Bank's outward remittance advice. (6) Transfer Pricing Audit Report dated October 22, 2002 was filed along with the return of income. (c) The above material was considered b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the said advertisement and marketing expenses details were filed during the original assessment as well as before Additional CIT (Transfer Pricing) (1), Mumbai. After examination and verification of expenses claimed as reimbursement, both, the then AO and TPO accepted the claim of the appellant and no addition / disallowance was made either in the transfer pricing order dated January 25, 2005 passed u/s 92CA(3) or in the original assessment order u/s 143(3) dated February 28, 2005. At the same time, the AO has not placed any material or evidence either on record or mentioned in the impugned assessment order to support that the expenses are bogus. A mere intimation from the investigation wing cannot be basis for any addition. Consequently, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at all these documents were submitted by the assessee in the course of original assessment, wherein the assessment was framed u/s 143(3). Before AO during reassessment proceedings assessee vide his letter informed that all these documents were furnished before AO and TPO during original assessment proceedings and by considering the same vide order dated 25th January, 2005 passed u/s 92CA(3) has examined all materials relating to claim of expenditure of advertisement. Similarly AO vide his order dated 23rd February, 2005 advanced assessee's claim after examining all these documents. 10. Thus, it is clear that all these documents, as pin pointed by DR was not additional documents so as to invoke the provisions of section 46A. 11. On mer....