Pharmalab Overseas Marketing Agency , ... vs Assessee

सव ौी जोगींि िसंह, याियक सदःय एवं नरे ि कुमार #ब$लै&या, लेखा सदःय के सम(

BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5526/Mum/2011 िनधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2005-06 (िनधा Pharmalab Overseas बनाम The JCIT 23(1), बनाम/ Marketing Agency, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, rd Vs. Kasturi, 3 Floor, C/12 Bandra Kurla Sanghvi Estate, Complex, Bandra(E), Station Road, Govandi (E), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 088 ःथायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. : AAAFP 1206F (अपीलाथ, /Appellant) .. (ू.यथ, / Respondent) अपीलाथ, ओर से/ Appellant by: Shri K. Gopal

ू.यथ, क0 ओर से/Respondent by: Shri J.Premanand

सुनवाई क0 तार2ख / Date of Hearing :28.01.2015 घोषणा क0 तार2ख /Date of Pronouncement :28.01.2015

आदे श / O R D E R

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-33, Mumbai dt. 9.06.2011 pertaining to assessment year 2005-06.

2. The sole grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 16 lakhs claimed by the assessee as bad debts.

2 ITA No. 5526/M/2011 3. The assessee is a merchant exporter of Pharmaceutical & allied machineries and spares. While scrutinizing the return of income and the details furnished by the assessee, The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has claimed Rs. 16 lakhs as bad debts, the said amount represented loan to M/s. Good Earth Industries Ltd. The assessee was asked to explain and justify its claim of bad debts. The assessee filed a detailed reply claiming that the said loan was given to M/s. Good Earth Industries Ltd., in the past. The interest earned from the said loan was offered under the head 'business income'. It was further explained that the assessee has been giving loans to other parties also for earning the interest income, it may be considered as engaged in business of lending money and therefore the claim of bad debt should be allowed. This explanation of the assessee was rejected by the AO who was of the opinion that the assessee is not engaged in the business of money lending nor it has any permission from appropriate authorities. The AO disallowed Rs. 16 lakhs.

4. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) but without any success.

5. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated his claim. The Ld. Counsel drew our attention to the additional evidences filed before us which is a copy of suit for recovery of loan alongwith certain related documents.

6. The Ld. Departmental Representative stated that since the additional evidences have been filed, the Revenue should get an opportunity to examine these documents.

3 ITA No. 5526/M/2011 7. We find force in the contention of the Ld. DR. Admitting the additional evidences, we restore the issue to the file of the AO. The assessee is directed to file these evidences/documents before the AO. The AO is directed to examine and verify the documents and decide the issue afresh as per provisions of the law.

8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 28th January, 2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (JOGINDER SINGH ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) याियक सदःय/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदःय / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

मुंबई Mumbai; 5दनांक Dated : 28th January, 2015

व.िन.स./ RJ , Sr. PS