State Bank of Patiala v. CIT

272 ITR 54High Court2005#1850 most cited

What is State Bank of Patiala v. CIT authority for?

A claim for deduction under Section 36(1)(viia) for bad and doubtful debts is restricted to the actual amount of provision made by the assessee, as the statutory language is clear and unambiguous.

62

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

State Bank of Patiala v. CIT · Section 36(1)(viia) · bad and doubtful debts deduction · provision for bad and doubtful debts · restriction on deduction · statutory interpretation · reassessment proceedings · Section 148 · Income-tax Act 1961

Also reported as

143 Taxmann 196

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 143(3) of the Income-tax ActSection 144 of the Income-tax ActSection 144B of the Income-tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 36(1)(via)section 36(1)(viia)section 36(1)(viii)section 36(1)(vii)section 36(1)section 36gross total incomeadvance taxsection 254section 80preassessment proceedingssection 80

Judgments citing State Bank of Patiala v. CIT

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

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

ITA 4678/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4678/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Union Bank Of India, Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, Central Accounts Department, Vs. World Trade Center, 6Th Floor, Cuff Parade, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Mumbai-400005 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 10Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 80L

…n case in ITA No.6920/Mum/2013 relating to AY 2005-06 in its order dated 31.7.2015 and the Tribunal has decided this issue against the assessee by following the decision rendered by the Hon‟ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of State Bank of Patiala (272 ITR 54). 23. Since the decision rendered by the Tribunal in AY 2005-06 is a later decision and since the Tribunal has followed the decision rendered by Hon‟ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, we are inclined to follow the same. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) on this issue and restore that of the AO. 24. In the result, the appeal filed…

ACIT, Mangalore vs. M/S Corporation Bank, Mangalore

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1264/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viiia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1264(Bang) 2013 (Assessment year : 2011-12) The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-2(1), Mangalore Appellant Vs M/s Corporation Bank, Financial Management Division, H.O.P.B No.88. Mangladevi Temple Road, Pandeshwar, Mangalore Respondent Pan No.AAACC7245E And ITA No.1352(B)/2013 (Assessment year : 2011-12) M/s Corporation Bank, Financial Management Division, H.O.P.B No.88. Mangladevi Temple Road, Pandeshwar, Mangalore Pan No.AAACC7245E Appell…