What is TRF Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

For claiming deduction for bad debts under section 36(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, it is sufficient for the assessee to write off the debt as irrecoverable in its accounts, and it is not necessary to prove that the debt has actually become irrecoverable.

How many judgments cite TRF Ltd. v. CIT?

714 judgments on BharatTax cite TRF Ltd. v. CIT (323 ITR 397), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does TRF Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 36(1)(vii), Section 147, Section 14A, Section 36(2), Section 148.

TRF Ltd. v. CIT (323 ITR 397)

DCIT 3 (1), Bhopal vs. M/S Narmada Switchgear P Ltd, Bhopal

Accordingly, this ground is also dismissed

ITA 307/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit-3(1) M/S Narmada Switchgear Bhopal Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Plot No.3, Industrial Estate, Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aabcn0635N Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 03.02.2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…this regard was furnished during the assessment proceedings. The debts arose in the ordinary course of business and the same had been credited to revenue account. The appellant has placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex court in the case of TRF Ltd.323 ITR 397. 7.2 I have gone through the assessment order as well as the written submission of the appellant. The Ld. A.O. has made addition of Rs. 80,29,726/- on account of bad debts written off as the appellant failed to produce adequate information and evidence of efforts for recovery of bad debts. During the assessment proceedings as well as appellate pr…

Harita Fehrer Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC - 2 (2), Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2746/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR

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

…ccount is sufficient to claim the bad debts and the appellant need not prove the debt has become bad, in order to claim the same under section 36(1)(vii) of the Income tax Act, by following the decision of Hon' ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT (323 ITR 397).” 3. As is evident, the issues that fall for our consideration in this year are – (i) Depreciation on non-complete Fees; (ii) Applicable Rate of depreciation on computer software; (iii) Claim of additional depreciation; (iv) Assessee’s claim of bad-debts written-off. The assessee being resident corporate assessee is stated to be engaged as foam…

Harita Fahrer Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-2(2), Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3481/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR

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

…ccount is sufficient to claim the bad debts and the appellant need not prove the debt has become bad, in order to claim the same under section 36(1)(vii) of the Income tax Act, by following the decision of Hon' ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT (323 ITR 397).” 3. As is evident, the issues that fall for our consideration in this year are – (i) Depreciation on non-complete Fees; (ii) Applicable Rate of depreciation on computer software; (iii) Claim of additional depreciation; (iv) Assessee’s claim of bad-debts written-off. The assessee being resident corporate assessee is stated to be engaged as foam…

Harita Fahrer Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-2(2), Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3480/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR

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

…ccount is sufficient to claim the bad debts and the appellant need not prove the debt has become bad, in order to claim the same under section 36(1)(vii) of the Income tax Act, by following the decision of Hon' ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT (323 ITR 397).” 3. As is evident, the issues that fall for our consideration in this year are – (i) Depreciation on non-complete Fees; (ii) Applicable Rate of depreciation on computer software; (iii) Claim of additional depreciation; (iv) Assessee’s claim of bad-debts written-off. The assessee being resident corporate assessee is stated to be engaged as foam…

Harita Fehrer Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Salary Circle II, Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2254/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR

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

…ccount is sufficient to claim the bad debts and the appellant need not prove the debt has become bad, in order to claim the same under section 36(1)(vii) of the Income tax Act, by following the decision of Hon' ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd Vs CIT (323 ITR 397).” 3. As is evident, the issues that fall for our consideration in this year are – (i) Depreciation on non-complete Fees; (ii) Applicable Rate of depreciation on computer software; (iii) Claim of additional depreciation; (iv) Assessee’s claim of bad-debts written-off. The assessee being resident corporate assessee is stated to be engaged as foam…

Jinal Capital Services Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2603/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyaljinal Capital Services Pvt. Ltd. 601/602, Fantasia, Vallabh Bhai Patel Road, Santacruz West, Mumbai-400054. Pan: Aaacj6928M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Paresh Shaparia Respondent By : Sh. Vranda U Matkari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22/12/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/01/2023 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai Dated 02.09.2022 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As In Law The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of 2 Ita No. 2603 Mum 2022-Jinal Capital Services Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Sh. Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Sh. Vranda U Matkari, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(ii)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jinal Capital Services Pvt. Ltd. 601/602, Fantasia, Vallabh Bhai Patel Road, Santacruz West, Mumbai-400054. PAN: AAACJ6928M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Paresh Shaparia Respondent by : Sh. Vranda U Matkari, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 22/12/2022 Date of pronouncement : 24/01/2023 ORDER PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Inc…

Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax 19(1), Mumbai vs. Ketan Anil Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2188/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asst. Commissioner Of Ketan Anil Shah Income-Tax 19(1), Mumbai, 44/B Rajul Apartment Vs. Matru Mandir, Room No.203, J Mehta Marg, Napean Sea Grant Road, Mumbai-400 007 Road, Mumbai-400 006 Pan No. Aaips 9400 J Appellant Respondent : Revenue By Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Anish Shah, Ca & Shri Haridas Bhat Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/01/2023

For Appellant: Shri Anish Shah, CA &For Respondent: Revenue by Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 45V

…deduction u/s. 36(l)(vii) of the Act which is complied with by the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decisi on of the Apex Court in TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] and the Board Circular No. . CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] and the Board Circular No. 12/2016 . CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] and the Board Circular No. [F.NO.279/MISC./140/2015-ITJ], DATED 30-5-2016. Therefore, the observations of [F.NO.279/MISC./140/2015 Therefore, the observations of the AO in para 4.11 and para 4.14 of the assessment or…

The Godavari Sugar Mills P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3592/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2006-07

Section 143(3)

…. It is not in dispute that the assessee had duly written off the said bad debts as irrecoverable in its books of accounts and claimed the same as deduction. Hence, the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 323 ITR 397 (SC) would come to the rescue of the assessee herein. 2.3. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that assessee would 5 M/s. Somaiya Properties and Investments Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly known as The Godavari Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd.) be entitled for deduction of bad debt…

Sbi Capital Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result the, all the appeals of the assesse are partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1511/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2005-06