2022 (12) TMI 927

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai, ["learned CIT(A)"], for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:- "That the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)"), is bad in law and is liable to be set aside. 2. That the Assessing Officer ("AO") and CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in disallowing the payments made by the Appellant towards marketing expenses to EIH Ltd and The Lalit Golf & Spa Resort Goa. 3. That the CIT(A) erred in upholding the AO's conclusion that the Appellant failed to prove the genuineness of the aforesaid expenses. 4. That the AO/CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the evidence adduced by the Appellant demonstrat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erved that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs. 2,17,52,924 on account of marketing expenses. Accordingly, the assessee was asked to submit the names and addresses of the parties to whom the aforesaid amount was paid. To verify the genuineness of the aforesaid payment, information was called under section 133(6) of the Act. Initially, in respect of 5 parties, the notice issued under section 133(6) of the Act was returned unserved. However, subsequently, 3 out of 5 aforesaid parties filed their response to the notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act. Ultimately, only two parties, namely, M/s EIH Ltd and The Lalit Golf and Spa Resort failed to respond to the notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act. In respect of the payment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o contact these parties to persuade them to file a response to the notice issued under section 133(6) of the Act. It was further submitted that both the entities are well-known Hotel chains in India and therefore it cannot be assumed that the assessee's transaction of payment of marketing expenditure to these entities is not genuine merely because these entities failed to respond to the notice issued under section 133(6) of the Act. 7. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative vehemently relied upon the orders passed by the lower authorities. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. During the year, the assessee incurred marketing expenditure of Rs. 2,17,52,924 which wa....