ACCUREX BIOMEDICAL P LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) -14, MUMBAI

During hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Sachin Ramani, filed certain additional evidence running into 34 pages by contending that if the matter may be examined afresh, the truth will ooze out, therefore, the matter may be remanded to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer. On the other hand, the Ld. DR, Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, defended the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing of diagnostic and urine testing kits and trading in instruments, kits and accessories relating to pathology test. The Ld. Assessing Officer while framing the assessment disallowed club expenses of Rs.13,23,600/- paid towards membership taken in the name of one of the Directors of the assessee company. The stand of the assessee is that the such expenses were incurred to enhance the existing business. The Ld. counsel relied upon the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT vs United Glass MGF Co. Ltd. (Civil Appeal No.6447 of 2012), order dated 12/09/2012. The assessee has also filed a compilation running into 34 pages containing certain information which could not be filed earlier. Considering the totality of facts, we remand this evidences to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to examine the claim of the assessee and decide in accordance with law. Needless to mention here that the assessee be provided due opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to furnish necessary evidence, if any, in support of its claim.