2017 (11) TMI 1754

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in not deleting the wrongful addition made by Ld.AO (for Assessing Officer) amounting to Rs. 8,48,358/-, erroneously treating the fully allowable advertisement expenses as capital in nature under section 37 of the Act. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT-A erred in not deleting the wrongful addition made by Ld.AO amounting to Rs. 95,90,000/-, erroneously treating the fully allowable expense as not accrued and crystallized during extant period." 2. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is a company deriving income from the manufacturing of scented, chewing tobacco, kimam and perfumery compounds. During the financial year 2010-11, the assessee company is also started business operations f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and even the Ld. CIT(A) also concluded the matter on reading the agreement, but without allowing the opportunity to the assessee to put forth their contentions. Order of the Ld.CIT(A) also reads that it is the contention of the assessee that without affording an opportunity to the assessee to explain the stand in respect of the brand advertisement expense in the light of Franchise Agreement dated 02.04.2010, the AO decided the issue making the addition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to remand the matter to the file of the AO to verify the stand of the assessee in respect of the brand advertisement expenses in the light of the Franchise Agreement dated 02.04.....