PCIT v. Sarvana Selvarathanam Trading & Manufacturing (P) Ltd.

415 ITR 146Reported decision#24914 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115-PSection 115JBSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 28Section 28(iv)Section 36(1)(vii)

Issues it is cited on

section 28section 115section 11section 25transfersection 250companysection 143(3)indianfactotal incomebusiness

Judgments citing PCIT v. Sarvana Selvarathanam Trading & Manufacturing (P) Ltd.

ACIT 2(2)(1) Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai vs. National Peroxide Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No 2816/Mum/2023 is partly allowed

ITA 2816/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Account Member & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeacit 2(2)(1) Mumbai Vs National Peroxide Limited 4Th Floor, Naville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aabcn7072K

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R Singh, CIT DR
Section 115Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 43B

…loss sustained by the appellant as a result of misappropriation by Chandratan is one which is incidental to the profits under section 10(1) of the Act.". 2. The Madras High Court in the case of PCIT v/s Sarvana Selvarathanam Trading & Manufacturing (P) Ltd. (415 ITR 146) 2019, Honourable Madras High Court was examining the allowability of the loss arising on the embezzlement of cash as Bad Debt. The Court in this case observed that: "The embezzlement by one of the Directors or an employee of the business of the Assessee Company during the ordinary course of business can be a business loss of the Assessee irres…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 1(1)(1), Bangalore, Bmtc Building, Koramangala, Baqngalore vs. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited, Bescom Corporate Office

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the ld

ITA 710/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S. Annamalai & Joseph Varghese, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…e. Therefore the same is a business loss to the assessee and is allowable in view of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of 34 ITR 10, the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of 349 ITR 240 and honourable Madras High court in 415 ITR 146. Assessee also relied upon the several judicial precedents in his case law compilations. 46. The learned departmental representative referred to the paragraph number 10.8 (c ) of the order of the learned CIT – A and submitted that assessee has failed to give any evidence with respect to the amount written of which is merely a provision for bad a…

M/S. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd., Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the ld

ITA 426/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S. Annamalai & Joseph Varghese, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…e. Therefore the same is a business loss to the assessee and is allowable in view of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of 34 ITR 10, the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of 349 ITR 240 and honourable Madras High court in 415 ITR 146. Assessee also relied upon the several judicial precedents in his case law compilations. 46. The learned departmental representative referred to the paragraph number 10.8 (c ) of the order of the learned CIT – A and submitted that assessee has failed to give any evidence with respect to the amount written of which is merely a provision for bad a…

PCIT v. Sarvana Selvarathanam Trading & Manufacturing (P) Ltd. (415 ITR 146) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax