CIT v. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.

256 ITR 772High Court2002#9599 most cited

What is CIT v. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. authority for?

A debt written off is allowable as a deduction if the assessee establishes that the debt was written off in its books of account.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd. · bad debt deduction · written off debt · books of account · allowance of bad debt · income tax act

Judgments citing CIT v. Morgan Securities & Credits (P) Ltd.

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

…y the assessee in its books during the year ending 31.03.2005. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 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 an…

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

…y the assessee in its books during the year ending 31.03.2005. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 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 an…

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

…y the assessee in its books during the year ending 31.03.2005. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 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 an…

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

…y the assessee in its books during the year ending 31.03.2005. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 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 an…

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

…y the assessee in its books during the year ending 31.03.2005. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: 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 an…

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)

…ite off. The Amending Act, 1987, has, therefore, amended these clauses to withdraw them after the assessment year 1988-89.” The conundrum which has arisen before us had also engaged the attention of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Girish Bhagwatprasad [2002] 256 ITR 772 with which we are in respectful agreement. Our learned brothers had pointedly observed that the genuineness of the claim predicted on section 36(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act was not in doubt. Where the loan transaction is itself shrouded in uncertainty other provisions of the status would immediately come into play. Our learned brothers further…

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)

…ite off. The Amending Act, 1987, has, therefore, amended these clauses to withdraw them after the assessment year 1988-89.” The conundrum which has arisen before us had also engaged the attention of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Girish Bhagwatprasad [2002] 256 ITR 772 with which we are in respectful agreement. Our learned brothers had pointedly observed that the genuineness of the claim predicted on section 36(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act was not in doubt. Where the loan transaction is itself shrouded in uncertainty other provisions of the status would immediately come into play. Our learned brothers further…

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)

…ite off. The Amending Act, 1987, has, therefore, amended these clauses to withdraw them after the assessment year 1988-89.” The conundrum which has arisen before us had also engaged the attention of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Girish Bhagwatprasad [2002] 256 ITR 772 with which we are in respectful agreement. Our learned brothers had pointedly observed that the genuineness of the claim predicted on section 36(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act was not in doubt. Where the loan transaction is itself shrouded in uncertainty other provisions of the status would immediately come into play. Our learned brothers further…

Ashok Mittal vs. ITO, Ward-24(3)

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

ITA 3764/DEL/2004[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2017AY 2001-2002

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)

…ite off. The Amending Act, 1987, has, therefore, amended these clauses to withdraw them after the assessment year 1988-89.” The conundrum which has arisen before us had also engaged the attention of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Girish Bhagwatprasad [2002] 256 ITR 772 with which we are in respectful agreement. Our learned brothers had pointedly observed that the genuineness of the claim predicted on section 36(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act was not in doubt. Where the loan transaction is itself shrouded in uncertainty other provisions of the status would immediately come into play. Our learned brothers further…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. S.B. Packaging Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4130/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri R.S.Syal, Am & Sri C.M.Garg, Jm Ita No. 4130/Del./2010 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Dcit Vs S.B.Packaging Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Vardhman Plaza Corner, Circle-7(1), Room No. 312, 3Rd Floor, C.R. Building, Inder Enclave, Paschim Vihar, I.P.Estate, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcs3731Q

For Appellant: Ms. Anina Bernwal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Gupta, CA
Section 36

…) CIT v. Autometers Ltd. (2008) 167 Taxman 286 (Delhi) CIT v. DCM Ltd. (2008) 167 Taxman 160 (Delhi) CIT v. Nai Duniya (2006) 154 Taxman 493 (M.P.) CIT v. Morgan Securities and Credits (P) Ltd. (2007) 162 Taxman 124 (Del.) CIT. v. Girish Bhagwat Prasad (2002) 256 ITR 772,774 (Guj.) A.W. Figgis & Company Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2002) 254 ITR 63, 65-66 (Cal.) While going through the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, Hon’ble Delhi High Court and the various other court and also the provision of the law its stands today and also going through the material on record, I am left with no option but to allow the appellant…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Grameen Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 949/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Nov 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Shesadri, CA
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ut has actually written off the entire amount of Rs.4,52,73,321 by credit to the relevant advances account thus reducing the assets correspondingly. The assessee relied on the decisions of Vijaya Bank v. CIT, 323 ITR 166 (SC) and CIT v. Girish Bhagawatprasad, 256 ITR 772,773 (Guj). 19. The CIT(Appeals) relying on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT v. Krone Communication Ltd., 333 ITR 497 (Karn) allowed the assessee’s appeal on this issue. 20. Aggrieved the department is in appeal and has raised ground No.3 as follows:- “3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the lea…