The Tribunal held that the AO issued notices to the eleven parties to whom the assessee had claimed to have paid advertisement expenses and such notices had returned with the remark that the address was not correct. However, the assessee was not confronted with the fact of the return of notices. Therefore, the issue was remitted to the Assessing Officer who should redecide the issue after confronting the assessee and after hearing the assessee. (AY. 2014-15)
Anurag Rastogi v. ITO (2019) 75 ITR 8 (Luck.)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business Expenditure–Advertisement expenses-Assessee not confronted with fact that notices to parties to whom expenses claimed to have been paid returned unserved-Matter Remanded–AO to decide afresh after confronting assessee and after hearing assessee.