How many judgments cite DIA v. Oman International Bank?

31 judgments on BharatTax cite DIA v. Oman International Bank (313 ITR 128), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does DIA v. Oman International Bank come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10(15), Section 10(23G), Section 10(34), Section 10(35), Section 115JB, Section 14A.

DIA v. Oman International Bank

313 ITR 128High Court2009#3827 most cited

What is DIA v. Oman International Bank authority for?

A company is not required to prove that a debt has become bad to claim a deduction; writing off the debt as irrecoverable in the company's accounts is sufficient, especially after the amendment of Section 36(1)(vii) from April 1, 1989.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DIA v. Oman International Bank · 313 ITR 128 · section 36(1)(vii) · bad debt deduction · write off debt · irrecoverable debt · business expenditure · income tax act · Bombay High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 10(15)Section 10(23G)Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 115JB Section 14A Section 234B Section 234D

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)section 36(1)(vii)section 36(1)section 36 section 37 assistant commissioner appeal before the tribunal opportunity of being heard company section 143(3)total income business

Judgments citing DIA v. Oman International Bank

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tema India Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 4884/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 4884/Mum/2015 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) The Dcit- 14(3)(1), Vs. M/S Tema India Limited, 155, Aayakar Bhavan, B-607, Bsel Tech Park, 4Th Floor, M.K. Marg, Sector – 30, Vashi, Mumbai - 400020 Opposite Vashi Station, Navi Mumbai - 400705 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaact1735C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Somanath S. Ukkali (Dr) यनर्ावररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri M. Subramanian (Ar) सुनर्ाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/06/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 31/08/2017

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian (AR)For Respondent: Shri Somanath S. Ukkali (DR)

Section 143

…On the other hand, the Ld. authorized representative of the assessee (AR) relying on the findings of Ld. CIT (A) submitted that the findings of Ld. CIT (A) is based on the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Star Chemicals 313 ITR 126 (Bomb.) in which the Hon’ble High Court has held that if the advances is written off the same will be treated as business loss and may be allowed as business expenditure in the year it was written off. 6. We have considered the rival submissions and also gone through the material placed before us. We notice that the Ld. CIT (A) has based his fin…

Olympus Elevator Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal (in ITA No

ITA 149/CHNY/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Sanath Kumar Raha, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 15.05.2017

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…dingly, setting aside the impugned order, restored the file of the AO for fresh determination. Here it may be pertinent to mention that a debt written off u/s. 36(1)(vii) has to be, nevertheless, a genuine claim (DIT(IT) v. Oman International Bank SAOG [2009] 313 ITR 128 (Bom)). 4. The second issue arising in the assessee’s appeal is qua the addition on account of a liability/s written back in accounts (to the income account), being no longer required, i.e., as not representing a liability or anticipated expenditure. The background facts of the case are that the assessee, a wholly owned subsidiary of Kone Elevat…

Olympus Elevator Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal (in ITA No

ITA 148/CHNY/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Sanath Kumar Raha, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 15.05.2017

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

Sahana Builders & Developers P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6594/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sandeep Gosainsahana Builders & Developers फनाभ/ Dcit-8(3), Private Limited, Mumbai. Vs. 402, Sagar Avenue, 54, S.V. Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aahcs4782P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Uttamchand BothraFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…, we find the claim of the assessee is proper and the assessee entitled to relief on this part of the bad debts too. We direct the AO grant relief as per the law. The assessee relied on the jurisdictional High Court Judgment in the case of Star Chemicals P Ld 313 ITR 126, Padamji Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd ITA 1590/2013 dt 5.8.2015 etc in support of the above. We find the said decision helps the assessee. Accordingly, this part of the issue and related grounds are allowed. 6. Adjustment to the WIP account: it was already discussed that the assessee is a builder and the developer. He follows the project completion m…

M.K. Creations, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 14(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3885/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Years: 2010-11 M/S M.K. Creations, Income Tax Officer C/O- Shankarlal Jain & Ward-14(1)(3), बनाम/ Associates, Earnest House, Vs. 12, Engineer Building, Nariman Point, 265, Princess Street, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400002 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pa No.:-Aaafm2004J "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Shankarlal Jain Shri Suman Kumar-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 06/04/2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 07/04/2017 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 50Section 72

…51 dated 23/01/1990. Our view find support from the 12 M/s M. K. Creations ratio laid down in CIT vs Brilliant Tutorials Pvt. Ltd. 292 ITR 399 (Mad.), CIT vs Morgan Securities and Credits Pvt. ltd. (210 CTR 336)(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 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),…

Addl.C.I.T. RG. 5(2), Mumbai vs. C.A. India Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 17/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna and Shri Ravi SawnnaFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ “ “ “ केकेकेके” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, , , , शि"जीत डे एवं शि"जीत डे शि"जीत डे, "याियक शि"जीत डे "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Saktijit Dey,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/ ITA No.17/Mum/2012 : िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण व…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Modi Apollo International Group Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for A

ITA 223/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri L.P. Sahu & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 195Section 35ASection 40

…345 (Del) • CIT vs. Coates of India Limited: 232 ITR 324 (Cal) • CIT vs. Brilliant Tutorials (P) Ltd: 292 ITR 399 (Mad) • Nandlal Vithaldas v. CIT: 180 ITR 609 (Bom) • CIT v. Star Chemicals (Bombay) P. Ltd.: 220 CTR 319 • DIT v. Oman International Bank SAOG: 313 ITR 128 (Bom) Reliance is placed on the recent Circular No. 12/2016 issued by CBDT clarified that it is sufficient for the assessee to write off the debts as irrecoverable in the books of accounts to claim deduction. Having regard to the aforesaid decisions of the Courts it is amply clear that it has been left to the prudence of the businessman to judg…

DCIT (OSD) RG 8(1), Mumbai vs. Control Print (India) Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2005/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year: 2006-07 Dcit(Osd), Range-8(1), M/S Control Print (India) Ltd. Room No.260A, 2Nd Floor, C-106, Hind Saurashtra बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Industrial Estate, M.V. Road, Vs. M.K. Road, Marol Naka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400059 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacc5378C

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)

…by CBDT Circular No.551 dated 23/01/1990. Our view find support from the ratio laid down in CIT vs Brilliant Tutorials Pvt. Ltd. 292 ITR 399 (Mad.), CIT vs Morgan Securities and Credits Pvt. ltd. (210 CTR 336)(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 Ltd. 292 ITR 345 (Del.). So far as, the reliance upon the decision in Kashmir Trading Company vs DCIT and Ahamadabad Electricity Company Ltd. (sup…

R.K. Chari Stock Broking P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA N0

ITA 1486/MUM/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1486/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02) बनाम/ R.K. Chari Stock Broking Income Tax Officer - Pvt. Ltd., 4(2)(1), V. 102, Mittal Chambers, Mumbai. Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr3054L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By Shri Bhavin M Dedhia Revenue By : Shri B.S. Bist (Sr. D.R.)

For Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist (Sr. D.R.)

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

…n law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as 'the learned CIT (A)'] erred in not following the Jurisdictional Bombay High Court Judgment of Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) vs. Oman International Bank SAOG 313 ITR 128 that evidences are not required to be produced in case of Bad Debts in view of the retrospective amendments in the section 36(1)(vii). 1.2 The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in not appreciating that considering the nature of the business the Appellant is engaged in, executing the erroneous transaction of purchasing and selling of the shares on acc…

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)

…ied by CBDT Circular No.551 dated 23/01/1990. Our view find support from the ratio laid down in CIT vs Brilliant Tutorials Pvt. Ltd. 292 ITR 399 (Mad.), CIT vs Morgan Securities and Credits Pvt. ltd. (210 CTR 336)(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 Ltd. 292 ITR 345 (Del.). In view of these facts and the judicial pronouncements discussed hereinabove, this ground of the assessee is allowed. 3. The…

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

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