Held that the assessee had duly furnished all possible details with relevant supporting evidences to justify incurrence of said foreign travel expenses. The  directors of assessee-company had undertaken these foreign trips together with architect and advocate as case might be which itself proved that foreign visits were purely meant only for business purposes and no personal purpose could be established thereon as why would any person take architect and advocate along with him while going on a personal trip abroad. For the  purpose of foreign visits was to be decided by assessee and Assessing Officer could not step into shoes of businessman and decide if same was required or not. Since the  assessee had furnished all details with supporting evidence so as to show purpose of foreign travel, it could not be concluded that they were only pleasure tours. Disallowance is deleted. Held that the assessee gave detailed explanation as to purpose of travel, names of persons who travelled, break-up of fuel expenses, etc. together with relevant supporting evidence. There was not any personal element in such expenses. On facts ad hoc disallowance of expenses is directed to be deleted. As regards the sales promotion expenses the Tribunal held that expense was not personal in nature. Assessee had duly furnished all details and supporting evidence along with entire bills issued by various vendors.  On facts  disallowance made by Assessing Officer is held to be  unjustified.  (AY. 2012-13 )