ANJU SINGH BAGHEL,JABALPUR vs. ACIT-CIRCLE 2(1) , JABALPUR

ITA 101/JAB/2022Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur26 May 2026AY 2008-096 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found an inherent contradiction in the findings of the lower authorities regarding the allowability of the expenditure. Consequently, the case was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after verifying the material furnished by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a bad debt of Rs. 20,09,648/- on account of contractor bad debts written off. The Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) rejected this claim, treating it as penal in nature or lacking sufficient evidence. The assessee contended it was an unrecoverable amount for work done and that the dispute was regarding rates.

What were the issues?

Whether the amount written off as contractor bad debts is allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(vii) read with Section 36(2) of the Income Tax Act, and whether the reopening of assessment was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(vii),Section 36(2),Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH “SMC”, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, CA
For Respondent: Shri Rahul Padha, JC-2

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 28.09.2022 pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A) NFAC erred in treating the reopening of the assessment as correct, despite the Notice u/s 154 for rectification of the original assessment of 29/10/2010 u/s 143(3) of the IT Act vehemently rebutted by the assessee and subsequently replying to the audit query and later simply on the basis of audit query initiating the proceedings u/s 147 is unjustified and infr

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 36(1)(vii)

All 1,429 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(vii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →