210 (Del.), CIT v. M/s Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201

292 ITR 345High Court2007#3850 most cited
31

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(2)Section 234ASection 234BSection 244ASection 270ASection 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

Judgments citing 210 (Del.), CIT v. M/s Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201

THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC,GUGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOMNE TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2630/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshthe Louis Berger Group Inc, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 3, Surinder Jakhir Dcit/Acit, International Bhawan, Sector-32, Gurgaon Taxation, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl4067F

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vazanta, CIT DR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…to the Assessing Officer for de novo consideration of the above-mentioned aspect only and that too only to the extent of the write off.” Similar was the view taken by the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court 11. in the case of CIT Vs. Autometers Ltd reported in 292 ITR 345 (Del) as under:- “6. Section 36(1)(vii), as it stands w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, reads as follows: 36. Other deductions.--(1) The deductions provided for in the following clauses shall be allowed in respect of the matters dealt with therein, in computing the income referred to in Section 28-- (i)--(iv) xxxxxx (vii) subject to the provisions of Sub-…

M/S OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1253/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 132Section 153C

…: i. Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 [SC] ii. CIT vs. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd., 292 ITR 339 [Del] iii. CIT vs. Girish Bhagwatprasad, 256 ITR 772 [Guj] iv. CIT vs. Brilliant Tutorials Private Limited, 292 ITR 399 [Mad] v. CIT vs. Autometers Ltd., 292 ITR 345 [Del] vi. Board Circular No. 551, dated 23, 1990, 183 ITR (St.) 7 vi. Unreported decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raheja Development Corporation. 16. The CIT(Appeals) accepted the submissions of the assessee and deleted the disallowance by holding that – 8.1 I find strength in the argument of the appellant that for a bad…

M/S OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1252/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 132Section 153C

…: i. Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 [SC] ii. CIT vs. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd., 292 ITR 339 [Del] iii. CIT vs. Girish Bhagwatprasad, 256 ITR 772 [Guj] iv. CIT vs. Brilliant Tutorials Private Limited, 292 ITR 399 [Mad] v. CIT vs. Autometers Ltd., 292 ITR 345 [Del] vi. Board Circular No. 551, dated 23, 1990, 183 ITR (St.) 7 vi. Unreported decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raheja Development Corporation. 16. The CIT(Appeals) accepted the submissions of the assessee and deleted the disallowance by holding that – 8.1 I find strength in the argument of the appellant that for a bad…

M/S. OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1251/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 132Section 153C

…: i. Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 [SC] ii. CIT vs. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd., 292 ITR 339 [Del] iii. CIT vs. Girish Bhagwatprasad, 256 ITR 772 [Guj] iv. CIT vs. Brilliant Tutorials Private Limited, 292 ITR 399 [Mad] v. CIT vs. Autometers Ltd., 292 ITR 345 [Del] vi. Board Circular No. 551, dated 23, 1990, 183 ITR (St.) 7 vi. Unreported decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raheja Development Corporation. 16. The CIT(Appeals) accepted the submissions of the assessee and deleted the disallowance by holding that – 8.1 I find strength in the argument of the appellant that for a bad…

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S OLIVIYA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1212/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 132Section 153C

…: i. Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 [SC] ii. CIT vs. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd., 292 ITR 339 [Del] iii. CIT vs. Girish Bhagwatprasad, 256 ITR 772 [Guj] iv. CIT vs. Brilliant Tutorials Private Limited, 292 ITR 399 [Mad] v. CIT vs. Autometers Ltd., 292 ITR 345 [Del] vi. Board Circular No. 551, dated 23, 1990, 183 ITR (St.) 7 vi. Unreported decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raheja Development Corporation. 16. The CIT(Appeals) accepted the submissions of the assessee and deleted the disallowance by holding that – 8.1 I find strength in the argument of the appellant that for a bad…

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S OLIVIYA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1211/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 132Section 153C

…: i. Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 [SC] ii. CIT vs. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd., 292 ITR 339 [Del] iii. CIT vs. Girish Bhagwatprasad, 256 ITR 772 [Guj] iv. CIT vs. Brilliant Tutorials Private Limited, 292 ITR 399 [Mad] v. CIT vs. Autometers Ltd., 292 ITR 345 [Del] vi. Board Circular No. 551, dated 23, 1990, 183 ITR (St.) 7 vi. Unreported decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Raheja Development Corporation. 16. The CIT(Appeals) accepted the submissions of the assessee and deleted the disallowance by holding that – 8.1 I find strength in the argument of the appellant that for a bad…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 30(1), NEW DELHI vs. SYED HABIBR REHMAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 7597/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…he write off fulfils the requirement of section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2). Reliance was placed on the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Morgan Securities and Credits (P.) Ltd. (2007) 292 ITR 339 (Del) and CIT vs. Autometers Ltd. (2007) 292 ITR 345 (Del) and CBDT Circular No. 12/2016 dated 30th May, 2016. 2 4.1 The assessee also assailed the observations of the Ld. AO. On page 4 of the assessment order, the Ld. AO stated that the fact of having written off the impugned bad debt is not mentioned in Form 3CD report filed by the assessee on 12.12.2016. The assessee submitted that there is no r…

ASST CIT 1 (3)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S JANAKALYN SAHAKARI BANK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result these appeals by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6840/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(yii)

…)(Del.), DCIT vs Oman International Bank Saog.(313 ITR 128)(Bom.), CIT vs. Star chemicals(Bom.) Pvt. Ltd. 220 CTR 319 (BOM.), CIT vs. Global Capital Ltd. 201 taxation 210 (Del.), CIT vs M/s. Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201 taxation 216)(Del.), CIT vs Auto Meters 292 ITR 345 (Dei.). So, far as, the reliance upon the decision in Kashmir trading Company vs DCIT and Ahmadabad Electricity Company Ltd. (supra), the decision from the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court and Gujarat High Court are concerned, the Hon'ble Apex Court, Later on in T.R. F. Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397(SC), considering the provision of section 36(1)(vii ), p…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SPPL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 22/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…ooks of accounts and, therefore, its case was squarely covered by the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 placed at paper book 39 of compilation of judgements. Ld. A.R. further relied upon the case law of Auto Meters Ltd. 292 ITR 345 decided by Hon'ble Delhi High Court placed a paper book pages 42-43. Inviting our attention to A.O.'s objection in disallowing the write off of bad debts, Ld. A.R. submitted that the A.O. had disallowed the claim holding that loan given by assessee has not fully become irrecoverable as the loanee was not declared BIFR Company and the case was pen…

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5525/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…r disallowed the entire claim of bad debt of Rs. 3,59,27,971/-. 6.4 The Ld. CIT(A) in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 and decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Autometers Ltd 292 ITR 345 (Delhi) held that once the debt has been written off in the books of accounts of the assessee as irrecoverable, the claim of bad debt is allowable and it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact has become irrecoverable. However, the Ld. CIT(A) asked the assessee to establish that the debt under dispute was appearing…

NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5524/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…r disallowed the entire claim of bad debt of Rs. 3,59,27,971/-. 6.4 The Ld. CIT(A) in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 and decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Autometers Ltd 292 ITR 345 (Delhi) held that once the debt has been written off in the books of accounts of the assessee as irrecoverable, the claim of bad debt is allowable and it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact has become irrecoverable. However, the Ld. CIT(A) asked the assessee to establish that the debt under dispute was appearing…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5492/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…r disallowed the entire claim of bad debt of Rs. 3,59,27,971/-. 6.4 The Ld. CIT(A) in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 and decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Autometers Ltd 292 ITR 345 (Delhi) held that once the debt has been written off in the books of accounts of the assessee as irrecoverable, the claim of bad debt is allowable and it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact has become irrecoverable. However, the Ld. CIT(A) asked the assessee to establish that the debt under dispute was appearing…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5491/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…r disallowed the entire claim of bad debt of Rs. 3,59,27,971/-. 6.4 The Ld. CIT(A) in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 and decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Autometers Ltd 292 ITR 345 (Delhi) held that once the debt has been written off in the books of accounts of the assessee as irrecoverable, the claim of bad debt is allowable and it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact has become irrecoverable. However, the Ld. CIT(A) asked the assessee to establish that the debt under dispute was appearing…

DCIT CEN CIR 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. SHAREKHAN LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1187/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…DCIT vs Oman International Bank Saog. (313 ITR 128)(Bom.), CIT vs Star Chemicals (Bom.) Pvt. Ltd. 220 CTR 319 (Bom.), CIT vs Global Capital Ltd. 201 taxation 210 (Del.), CIT vs M/s Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201 taxation 216)(Del), CIT vs Auto meters Ltd. 292 ITR 345 (Del.). So far as, the reliance upon the decision in Kashmir Trading Company vs DCIT and Ahamadabad Electricity Company Ltd. (supra), the decision from Hon’ble Rajasthan High court and Gujarat High Court are concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court, later on, in T.R.F. Ltd. vs CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC). Likewise, Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the c…

DCIT CEN CIR 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. SHAREKHAN LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1188/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…DCIT vs Oman International Bank Saog. (313 ITR 128)(Bom.), CIT vs Star Chemicals (Bom.) Pvt. Ltd. 220 CTR 319 (Bom.), CIT vs Global Capital Ltd. 201 taxation 210 (Del.), CIT vs M/s Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201 taxation 216)(Del), CIT vs Auto meters Ltd. 292 ITR 345 (Del.). So far as, the reliance upon the decision in Kashmir Trading Company vs DCIT and Ahamadabad Electricity Company Ltd. (supra), the decision from Hon’ble Rajasthan High court and Gujarat High Court are concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court, later on, in T.R.F. Ltd. vs CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC). Likewise, Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the c…

SHAREKHAN LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 3(3), MUMBAI

ITA 469/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…DCIT vs Oman International Bank Saog. (313 ITR 128)(Bom.), CIT vs Star Chemicals (Bom.) Pvt. Ltd. 220 CTR 319 (Bom.), CIT vs Global Capital Ltd. 201 taxation 210 (Del.), CIT vs M/s Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201 taxation 216)(Del), CIT vs Auto meters Ltd. 292 ITR 345 (Del.). So far as, the reliance upon the decision in Kashmir Trading Company vs DCIT and Ahamadabad Electricity Company Ltd. (supra), the decision from Hon’ble Rajasthan High court and Gujarat High Court are concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court, later on, in T.R.F. Ltd. vs CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC). Likewise, Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the c…

SHAREKHAN LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 3(3), MUMBAI

ITA 468/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…DCIT vs Oman International Bank Saog. (313 ITR 128)(Bom.), CIT vs Star Chemicals (Bom.) Pvt. Ltd. 220 CTR 319 (Bom.), CIT vs Global Capital Ltd. 201 taxation 210 (Del.), CIT vs M/s Excel Fashion Pvt. Ltd. (201 taxation 216)(Del), CIT vs Auto meters Ltd. 292 ITR 345 (Del.). So far as, the reliance upon the decision in Kashmir Trading Company vs DCIT and Ahamadabad Electricity Company Ltd. (supra), the decision from Hon’ble Rajasthan High court and Gujarat High Court are concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court, later on, in T.R.F. Ltd. vs CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC). Likewise, Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the c…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. ASHOK MITTAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, the

ITA 3743/DEL/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2001-02 Shri Ashok Mittal, Ito, Ward- 24(3), 42, Sainik Farms, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aaspm6882C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2001-02 Acit, Circle- 24(1), Shri Ashok Mittal, New Delhi. Vs. 42, Sainik Farms, New Delhi. Pan : Aaspm6882C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. C. Dande, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

…litigation would be eliminated by permitting a debt to be treated as a bad or irrecoverable no sooner it was written off in the books of the assessee concerned.” 11. The same has been the stand of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Autometres Ltd. [2007] 292 ITR 345 (Delhi); CIT v. IFCI Venture Capital Funds Ltd. [2008] 202 Taxation 329 (Del) and CIT v. Global Capital Ltd. [2008] 306 ITR 332 (Delhi) and more recently in CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh [2009] 309 ITR 233 (Delhi). In the last mentioned case at page 239, the Hon'ble High Court, on the facts of the case has held as under:- "As regards the second is…

SH. ASHOK MITTAL,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, the

ITA 3307/DEL/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2001-02 Shri Ashok Mittal, Ito, Ward- 24(3), 42, Sainik Farms, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aaspm6882C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2001-02 Acit, Circle- 24(1), Shri Ashok Mittal, New Delhi. Vs. 42, Sainik Farms, New Delhi. Pan : Aaspm6882C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. C. Dande, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

…litigation would be eliminated by permitting a debt to be treated as a bad or irrecoverable no sooner it was written off in the books of the assessee concerned.” 11. The same has been the stand of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Autometres Ltd. [2007] 292 ITR 345 (Delhi); CIT v. IFCI Venture Capital Funds Ltd. [2008] 202 Taxation 329 (Del) and CIT v. Global Capital Ltd. [2008] 306 ITR 332 (Delhi) and more recently in CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh [2009] 309 ITR 233 (Delhi). In the last mentioned case at page 239, the Hon'ble High Court, on the facts of the case has held as under:- "As regards the second is…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ASHOK MITTAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed, the

ITA 2997/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2001-02 Shri Ashok Mittal, Ito, Ward- 24(3), 42, Sainik Farms, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aaspm6882C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2001-02 Acit, Circle- 24(1), Shri Ashok Mittal, New Delhi. Vs. 42, Sainik Farms, New Delhi. Pan : Aaspm6882C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. C. Dande, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

…litigation would be eliminated by permitting a debt to be treated as a bad or irrecoverable no sooner it was written off in the books of the assessee concerned.” 11. The same has been the stand of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Autometres Ltd. [2007] 292 ITR 345 (Delhi); CIT v. IFCI Venture Capital Funds Ltd. [2008] 202 Taxation 329 (Del) and CIT v. Global Capital Ltd. [2008] 306 ITR 332 (Delhi) and more recently in CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh [2009] 309 ITR 233 (Delhi). In the last mentioned case at page 239, the Hon'ble High Court, on the facts of the case has held as under:- "As regards the second is…

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2