CIT v. Hotel Ambassador

253 ITR 430High Court2002#4325 most cited

What is CIT v. Hotel Ambassador authority for?

Deduction under Section 36(1)(vii) for bad debts is allowed only if the assessee debits the amount in its accounts as irrecoverable. Merely making a provision for Non-Performing Assets (NPA) does not constitute a write-off.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hotel Ambassador · Section 36(1)(vii) · bad debt deduction · write off · provision for NPA · irrecoverable · debiting accounts · Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)(v)section 41(4)section 31(3)section 36(l)(vii)section 197asection 197a(1a)section 36(1)(v)preliminary expensessection 36(1)(viia)section 36(1)(viii)section 43b(f)section 36(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Hotel Ambassador

Avijit Dewanjee, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3249/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 250(4)

…the write off takes place at the time of finalisation of account and reflected in the books of account, it cannot be treated as write of at all. This view of ours is supported by the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Hotel Ambassador, 253 ITR 430 (Ker). The assessee herein wants to claim the loss as business deduction without writing off the same in the customary accounts. In our opinion, in the instant case, the assessee is still having a ray of hope of recovery of the amount and the issue has not reached finality. Only on the issue reaching finality, the assessee could claim it as busin…

The Karnataka Bank Ltd, Mangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Mangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1906/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan & Smt. R. Lalitha, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

…ITA No.1906/Bang/2018 & ITA No.229/PAN/2018 M/s. The Karnataka Bank Ltd., Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Karnataka Bank Ltd. Head Office, Mahaveera Circle Deputy Commissioner of Kankanady Income-tax Vs. Mangalore 575 002 Circle-2(1) Mangalore PAN NO : AABCT5589K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year : 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of The Karnataka Bank Ltd. Income-tax Head Office, Mahaveera Circle Vs. Circle-2(1) Kankanady Mangalore Mangalore 575 002 APPELL…

M/S. Syndicate Bank, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1884/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

…(352 ITR 577)(SC), wherein it was held that the mere making of provision for NPA cannot be considered as write off u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act. He also relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hotel Ambassador (2002)(253 ITR 430)(Ker), wherein it was held that the deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act only if the assessee debits the same into the accounts as irrecoverable. He also observed that the “accounts” would refer to Profit and Loss account only and the assessee has not debited bad debts written off in its profit and loss account. Accordingly, the AO proposed to dis…

DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata vs. M/S J. K. Tyre & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 520/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(i)

…to have been written off in the books of account as the same was not charged to the profit and loss account for the year under consideration. The AO placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High court in the case of CIT vs Hotel Ambassador (2002) 253 ITR 430. The AO has held that the claim of bad debt was not allowable as the same has not been written off in the books account. The Ld. AR reiterated the submission made at the assessment stage. It was contended that the AO has erred in holding that the bad debt has not been written off in the books of account on the ground that the same was not charged…

DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata vs. M/S J. K. Tyre & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 519/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jul 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(i)

…to have been written off in the books of account as the same was not charged to the profit and loss account for the year under consideration. The AO placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High court in the case of CIT vs Hotel Ambassador (2002) 253 ITR 430. The AO has held that the claim of bad debt was not allowable as the same has not been written off in the books account. The Ld. AR reiterated the submission made at the assessment stage. It was contended that the AO has erred in holding that the bad debt has not been written off in the books of account on the ground that the same was not charged…

DCIT, Central Cir. VI, Kolkata vs. M/S J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

ITA 611/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Partha Sarathi Chowdhury

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…t the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the accounting treatment of the Bad Debt Written Off and hence he has erred in distinguishing the assessee of the assessee from the case of the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT-vs- Hotel Ambassador (2002) [253 ITR 430(Ker.)], relied upon by the AO and, accordingly, in directing to delete the disallowance to the tune of Rs.13,12,19,105/-.” ITA No.609-612/Kol/2013 & CO. 47/Kol2013 A.Ys. 07-08 to 10-11 DCIT, CC-VI Kol. Vs. M/s J.K.Lakshmi Cement Ltd. Page 16 28. Before us both the parties relied on the order of Authorities Below as favourable to them. 29. We hav…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. T Ahobala Rao

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/972/2006HC Karnataka04 Oct 2012

Bench: B.MANOHAR,K.SREEDHAR RAO

Section 132Section 158BSection 260Section 260A

…1 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA No.972/2006 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, NO.55/1, SHILPASHREE, VIDHYARANYA COMPLEX, VISHVESHWARANAGAR, MYSORE. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF THE INCOME TAX CENTRALCIRCLE NO.55/1, SHILPASHREE, VIDHYARANYA COMPLEX, VISHVESHWARANAGAR, MYSORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI.INDRAKUMAR, SR COUNSEL WITH E.SANMATHI ADV) AND : SRI.T.AHOBALA RAO, RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY MUTT ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, CHICKMAGALUR. ...RESPOND…