CIT v. T. Veerabhadra Rao

155 ITR 152Supreme Court of India1985#2672 most cited

What is CIT v. T. Veerabhadra Rao authority for?

When a partnership firm takes over the business of an earlier firm, all assets and liabilities transfer to the new firm. The deduction for bad debts is available to the assessee on the total amount written off, even if part of the debt (interest) was offered to tax in earlier years.

44

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. T. Veerabhadra Rao · 155 ITR 152 · partnership firm · take over business · earlier firm · assets and liabilities · bad debt deduction · total amount written off · interest offered to tax

Also reported as

22 Taxmann 45

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 1961Section 10(34)Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 10(35)Section 115JBSection 32(1)(iia)

Issues it is cited on

section 72atest of enduring benefitsection 32(2)section 31(1)section 35ddsection 170resulting companysection 50bsection 147(b)business transfer agreementsection 115jaademerger

Judgments citing CIT v. T. Veerabhadra Rao

Crisil Risk and Infrstructure Solutions Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6338/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year- 2008-09 Dcit-10(3), M/S Crisil Risk & Room No.451, 4Th Floor, Infrastructure Solution Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Central Avenue, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Mumbai-400020 Powai, Mumbai-400076 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabcc4655M Assessment Year- 2008-09 M/S Crisil Risk & Dcit-10(3), Infrastructure Solution Ltd. Room No.451, 4Th Floor, बनाम/ Central Avenue, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Hiranandani Business Maharshi Karve Road, Park, Powai, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400076 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabcc4655M

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,सी,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"नी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year- 2008-09 DCIT-10(3), M/s CRISIL Risk & Room No.451, 4th Floor, Infrastructure Solution Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Central Avenue, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Mumbai-400020 Powai, Mumbai-400076 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AABCC4655M Assessment Year- 2008-09 M/s CRISIL Risk & DCIT-10(3), Infrastructu…

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Crisil Risk & Infrastructure Soluiton Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6207/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year- 2008-09 Dcit-10(3), M/S Crisil Risk & Room No.451, 4Th Floor, Infrastructure Solution Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Central Avenue, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Mumbai-400020 Powai, Mumbai-400076 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabcc4655M Assessment Year- 2008-09 M/S Crisil Risk & Dcit-10(3), Infrastructure Solution Ltd. Room No.451, 4Th Floor, बनाम/ Central Avenue, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Hiranandani Business Maharshi Karve Road, Park, Powai, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400076 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabcc4655M

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,सी,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"नी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year- 2008-09 DCIT-10(3), M/s CRISIL Risk & Room No.451, 4th Floor, Infrastructure Solution Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Central Avenue, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Hiranandani Business Park, Mumbai-400020 Powai, Mumbai-400076 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AABCC4655M Assessment Year- 2008-09 M/s CRISIL Risk & DCIT-10(3), Infrastructu…

Commissioner of Income Tax-VI vs. Times Business Solution Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/209/2013HC Delhi09 Apr 2013
For Appellant: Mr Sanjeev RajpalFor Respondent: None
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 391

…61. Consequently, he rejected the claim in respect of the bad debts written off. 3. Thereupon, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who, following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Veerabhadra Rao: 155 ITR 152 (SC), held that the assesse was entitled to write off the irrecoverable bad debts although, the said debts had been acquired from the holding company. The Supreme Court in the said decision in the case of Veerabhadra Rao (supra) observed that if a business, along with its assets and liabilities, is transferred by one owner to another, there was n…

M/S. Southern Technologies Ltd vs. Joint Commnr. of Income Tax, Coimbatore

C.A. No.-001337-001337 - 2003Supreme Court11 Jan 2010
Section 145Section 2(24)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 37(1)

…nder the IT Act, the emphasis is not on the assessee being the creditor but taking into account of the debt in computing the business income. [See Section 36(2)] In Commissioner of Income-tax, A.P. v. T. Veerabhadra Rao K. Koteswara Rao & Co. reported in 155 ITR 152 at 157, it was found that the debt was taken into account in the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1963-64 when the interest accruing thereon was taxed in the hands of the assessee. The said interest was taxed as income as it represented accretion accruing during the earlier year on the moneys owed to the assessee by the debtor.…