IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA , AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM / I.T.A. NO. 4135 /MUM/20 19 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 5 - 16 ) M/S. AURA PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD. 306, A WING, HARI OM PLAZA, M. G. ROAD, BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI - 400066 . / VS. DCIT - 12(1)(1) AAYAKAR BHAVAN, R. NO.223, 2 ND FLOOR, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAICA1115H ( / APPELLA NT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / DATE OF HEARING: 03 / 0 8 /202 1 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27 /09 /2021 / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29 . 03 . 201 9 PASSED BY THE COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 20 , MUMBAI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT( A)) RELEVANT TO THE A.Y.20 15 - 1 6 . 2 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. DIRECTORS MEDI - CLAIM EXPENSES INCLUDING KEYMAN INSURANCE PREMIUM OF RS.2,46,706/ - DISALLOWED AS PERSONAL EXPENSES, BEING GENUINE BUSINESS EXPENSES, BE ALLOWED IN FULL. 2. YOUR APPELLANT PRAYS LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND MODIFY ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NONE REVENUE BY: SHRI BRAJENDRA KUMAR ( D R) ITA NO. 4135 /M UM /20 19 A.Y.20 1 5 - 16 2 3 . THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 28.09.2015 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.2,24,66,110/ - . THE CASE WAS SEL ECTED FOR SCRUTINY THROUGH THE CASS. NOTICES U/S 143(2) & 142(1) OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. ON VERIFICATION, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED A SUM OF RS.2,46,706 / - ON ACCOUNT OF INSURANCE PREMIUM FOR ITS DIRECTORS. THE NOTICE WAS GIVEN AND AFTER THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME WAS TREATED AS PERSONAL EXPENSES AND ACCORDINGLY DISALLOWED AND ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE . THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ASSESSED IN SUM OF RS. 3,27,12,812/ - . FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE REVENUE AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE C ASE FILED CAREFULLY. WE NOTICED THAT AT THE TIME OF DECIDING THE MATTER OF CONTROVERSY, THE AO NOWHERE EXAMINED THE INSURANCE POLICY BUT CIT(A) HAS DISCUSSED ABOUT THE EXAMINATION OF THE INSURANCE POLICY. THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) IS QUITE CONTRARY TO THE FINDING OF THE AO WHICH NOWHERE LEADS TO THIS FACT THAT THE AO HAS EXAMINED THE KEYMAN INSURANCE POLICY PERTAINING TO THE DIRECTORS/APPELLANTS IF ANY. ANYHOW, THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) IS NOT CONSIDERED TO THE JUSTIFIABLE, THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE FINDI NG OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE ISSUE BEFORE THE AO TO DECIDE THE MATTER OF CONTROVERSY AFRESH B Y EXAMINING THE INSURANCE POLICY AND ALSO BY GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ITA NO. 4135 /M UM /20 19 A.Y.20 1 5 - 16 3 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE S . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 / 09 /202 1 SD/ - SD/ - ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) (AMARJIT SINGH) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 27 / 09 /202 1 VIJAY PAL SINGH (SR. PS) / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TR UE COPY// / /(DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI