TRF Ltd. v. CIT

323 ITR 397Supreme Court of India2010#71 most cited

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.

714

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

TRF Ltd. v. CIT · section 36(1)(vii) · bad debts · deduction · irrecoverable · written off · assessee's accounts · income tax act

Also reported as

190 Taxmann 391230 CTR 14190 Taxmann.com 391

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 147Section 14ASection 36(2)Section 148Section 40(a)(ia)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)section 36(1)(vii)business expediencysection 36(1)section 36commercial expediencyrevenue expendituredisallowance under section 14acapital expendituresection 28section 115jsection 14a

Judgments citing TRF Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT CC 7(1), Mumbai vs. Maneesh Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 81/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2007-08
Section 10BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…of accounts. Therefore, the conditions of Sec. 36(1)(vii) r.w.s. 36(2) were duly fulfilled and the claim was allowable in terms of CBDT Circular No.12/2016 dated 30/05/2016 which has been issued after considering Hon'ble Apex Court's decision in TRF Limited (323 ITR 397; 09/02/2010). Therefore finding no infirmity in impugned order on this issue, we dismiss this ground of revenue's appeal.” 13. Accordingly in the background of the aforesaid decision and precedent, we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A). Apropos issue of finished goods written off :- 14. As detailed above in the order of l…

A.Manohar Prasad, Chennai vs. ITO Media Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 & 2008-09 are treated as partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1892/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

…mpliance of provisions of section 36(1)(vii) r.w.s. 36(2) of the Act and thus, there is no necessity to prove that debts become really bad. He supported his arguments with the help of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of T.R.F Limited vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397. 7. The ld.DR on the other hand strongly supporting order of the CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has failed to file any evidence to prove that deduction claimed towards bad debts thereof has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee of the previous year in which the amount of such 7 ITA. Nos: 1891 & 1892/Chny/2018 debt or…

A.Manohar Prasad, Chennai vs. ITO Media Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 & 2008-09 are treated as partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1891/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

…mpliance of provisions of section 36(1)(vii) r.w.s. 36(2) of the Act and thus, there is no necessity to prove that debts become really bad. He supported his arguments with the help of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of T.R.F Limited vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397. 7. The ld.DR on the other hand strongly supporting order of the CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has failed to file any evidence to prove that deduction claimed towards bad debts thereof has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee of the previous year in which the amount of such 7 ITA. Nos: 1891 & 1892/Chny/2018 debt or…

DCIT, C.Circle-5(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Cello Pens and Stationery Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 305/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2021AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 37(1)

…aw that after 1a April, 1989, it is not necessary that the debt itself must be proved to be irrecoverable. The only requirement is that the amounts claimed as bad debts should be written off as irrecoverable in the account of the assessee (see TRF Ltd V/s CIT-323 ITR 397 - date of order 05-08- 201 5). 15) The Hon'ble Delhi High Court, has held in the case of CIT Vs Samara India (P) Ltd (2013) 2016 Taxrnan 93, 'that for an assessee to claim deduction in relation to bad debts it is, now, no longer necessary to establish that debt had become irrecoverable and it is sufficient if assessee forms such an opinion and wr…

International Hospital Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1437/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 115JSection 14A

…ncome and deduction claimed in respect of actual bad debts of Rs. 69,69,460/-. In view of above discussion, bad debts claimed are allowed under section 336(1)(vii) of the Act in accordance with the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited (323 ITR 397).” 4.1 However, as regard to claim of bad debt written off under section 115JB for computation of the book profit was rejected by the learned CIT(A). The detailed finding of the learned CIT(A) in Para 18 to Para 22 after considering the submission of the assessee is reproduced as under: “18. As far as the provision for doubtful debts is concerne…

Reliance Life Sciences P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-8, Mumbai

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 533/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.533/Mum/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.534/Mum/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Reliance Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. Pr. Cit - 8 Dhirubhai Ambani Life Sciences Centre, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, बिाम/ R-282, Ttc Area Of Midc Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Thane Belapur Road, Rabale, Navi Mumbai-400 701 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabcr-7594-L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Nimesh Vora-Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Anand Mohan-Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 07/09/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 05/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 As Per The Provisions Of Section 263 Of Income Tax Act, 1961, The Revenue Authorities Namely Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax / Commissioner Of Income Tax Is Vested With The Supervisory Powers Of Suo-Moto Revision Of Any Order Passed By The Assessing Officer [Ao]. For The Said Purpose, The Appropriate Authority May Call For & Examine

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 263

…h a brief note on write-off of the accrued interest and details of interest income offered to tax in earlier year as business income and also a copy of ledger account of RLS BV. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. V/s CIT (323 ITR 397) in support of the claim. After verifying above details and having satisfied with documents filed, Ld. AO accepted the bad-debt claim and passed the assessment order. Since, Ld. AO verified the claim and allowed the deduction, the order could not be held to be erroneous. The assessee also made submissions that the claim on merits was allowable to…

C & K Management Limited, Secunderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1918/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2013-14 C&K Management Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Secunderabad. Ward – 1(3), Hyderabad. Pan – Aabcc 4481D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri J. Maruthi Raghuram Revenue By: Shri Sunku Srinivas Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/10/2021 O R D E R Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against Cit(A) - 1, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 04/05/2018 For Ay 2013-14 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ; In Short “The Act, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Ao Is Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. The Ld. Ao Disallowed Rs.58,170/-W.R.T Pf & Esi Payments Stating This Amount Is Not Paid Before The Due

For Appellant: Shri J. Maruthi RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivas
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 C&K Management Ltd., Vs. Income-tax Officer, Secunderabad. Ward – 1(3), Hyderabad. PAN – AABCC 4481D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri J. Maruthi Raghuram Revenue by: Shri Sunku Srinivas Date of hearing: 09/09/2021 Date of pronouncement: 04/10/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against CIT(A) - 1, Hyderabad’s order dated 04/05/2018 for AY 20…

National Projects Construction Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi

ITA 6854/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 36(2)

…d AO disallowed the above claim that the assessee has not produced the relevant details of old outstanding debts, therefore, he disallowed the same. The ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee following the decision of the Supreme Court in TRF Ltd Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 holding that when the assessee has written off the above sum, debts are already taken into income in earlier 6 ITA No.6854/Del./2017 years, it is allowable. Nothing new was argued by the ld DR and the ld AR also reiterated the arguments before the ld CIT(A). We find that when the assessee has written off a debt in its books of account, which wa…

ACIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi vs. National Projects Construction Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the ld AO for the Assessment Year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 3652/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. National Projects Construction Circle-17(2), Corporation Ltd, New Delhi Core-4, Scope Complex-7, Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaacr6117Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita M. Bishwas, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 37

…d AO disallowed the above claim that the assessee has not produced the relevant details of old outstanding debts, therefore, he disallowed the same. The ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee following the decision of the Supreme Court in TRF Ltd Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 holding that when the assessee has written off the above sum, debts are already taken into income in earlier years, it is allowable. Nothing new was argued by the ld DR and the ld AR also reiterated the arguments before the ld CIT(A). We find that when the assessee has written off a debt in its books of account, which was taken into computation o…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maryan Apparel (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3332/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 144Section 36(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K.N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Vs. Maryan Apparel (P) Ltd., Circle-16(1), A-201, Vardhman New Delhi Apartments, Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi PAN :AAECM5087C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr.DR Date of hearing 09.08.2021 Date of pronouncement 25.08.2021 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 31/03/2016 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income…

Manne Hareesh, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer 6(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 92/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing) Shri Manne Hareesh, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad-500 0016 Ward 6(2), Pan Admpm6479L Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T.Rama Murthy, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey (D.R) Date Of Hearing: 21/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/08/2021 O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, A.M. : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-6, Hyderabad Order Dt.10.10.2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “ 1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax - Appeals Erred Both On Facts & Provisions Of Law In Appreciating The Fact That Assessing Officer Failed Make Proper Conclusion/ Enquiry Before Making The Addition Made & Passing The Assessment Order.

For Appellant: Shri T.Rama Murthy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey
Section 147Section 36(1)(vii)

…enses. Further he submitted that the provisions for bad debts were debited to Profit & Loss Account but by mistake it was written as Provision for Bad Debts. He relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. T.R.F. Limited Vs. CIT (2019) 323 ITR 397 (SC) and submitted that there is no requirement to submit any details once those having considered as bad debts by the assessee and debited into Profit and Loss account. 6. On the other hand, the learned departmental representative relied on the order of authorities below and submitted that the assessee could not furnish the required document wh…

ACIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. Aventis Pharma Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2072/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Saktijit Dey ()

Section 271(1)(c)

…the assessee to prove that the debt has become bad and not recoverable. He submitted, once the debt is written off in the books of account, it has to be allowed. In support, learned senior counsel relied upon the following decisions:- i. TRF Ltd vs CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) ii. ACIT vs Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd ITA No.6444/Mum/2007, dt 28-01-2011 51. The learned departmental representative relied upon the observations of the assessing officer. 52. We have considered rival submissions in the light of decisions relied upon and perused the materials on record. As per the amended provision of section 36(…

ACIT Cir. - 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aventis Pharma Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 3187/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Saktijit Dey ()

Section 271(1)(c)

…the assessee to prove that the debt has become bad and not recoverable. He submitted, once the debt is written off in the books of account, it has to be allowed. In support, learned senior counsel relied upon the following decisions:- i. TRF Ltd vs CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) ii. ACIT vs Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd ITA No.6444/Mum/2007, dt 28-01-2011 51. The learned departmental representative relied upon the observations of the assessing officer. 52. We have considered rival submissions in the light of decisions relied upon and perused the materials on record. As per the amended provision of section 36(…

M/S. Aventis Pharma Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 3092/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Saktijit Dey ()

Section 271(1)(c)

…the assessee to prove that the debt has become bad and not recoverable. He submitted, once the debt is written off in the books of account, it has to be allowed. In support, learned senior counsel relied upon the following decisions:- i. TRF Ltd vs CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) ii. ACIT vs Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd ITA No.6444/Mum/2007, dt 28-01-2011 51. The learned departmental representative relied upon the observations of the assessing officer. 52. We have considered rival submissions in the light of decisions relied upon and perused the materials on record. As per the amended provision of section 36(…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Sppl Property Management Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2074/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Hon’Ble & Dr. M. L. Meena, Hon’Ble]

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…CIT(A) has allowed the claim of the assessee by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (i) Vijaya Bank vs. CIT (2010) 322 ITR 166 (SC) (ii) Southern Technologies Ltd. vs. CIT (2010) 320 ITR 577 (SC) (iii) T.R.F. Ltd. vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) 6. We note that the Ld. CIT(A) has taken note of the decision/ratio of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank (supra) and at page 18-21 of the impugned order has reproduced the analysis of the case which is as under: “Bad debt - Write-off - After 1st April, 1989, if an assessee debits an amount of doubtful debt to the profit and…

DCIT - 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6426/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 6425/Mum/2017 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12) आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 6426/Mum/2017 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 1140/Mum/2017 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Maharashtra Tourism Tax, Circle 1(2)(2), Development Corporation Room No. 535, 5 Th Floor, Aayakar Ltd. फनाभ/ Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 C.D.O. Hutments, Opp. Lic 020 Bldg, Mada Cama Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacm0712G अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Mamta Bansal, Cit Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Anil Sathe, Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 27.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Appeals Of The Revenue Are Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-8, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], Mr. Rajen Rasiklal Vora; Ay 10-11 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-8/It-365 & 366/15-16, Cit(A)- 2/It/10479/2016-17 Vide Dated 07.08.2017, 17.12.2018. The Assessments Were Framed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(2), Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Ys. 2011-12, 2012- 13, 2014-15 Vide Order Dated 01.03.2013, 27.03.2015, 28.12.2016 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Mamta Bansal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sathe, AR
Section 143(3)

…ther noted that such claim has been added back to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC) and also circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes vide its circular No.30.05.2016 No. 12/16 by holding the same as under:- “5.4.2 This issue was addressed and put to rest by the Supreme Court (SC) .In the case of TRF Limited vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, wherein it was held that post the amendment, it was not necessary for the taxpayer to es…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Sppl Property Management Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 22/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…and therefore, we allow Ground No.2. ii) Bad Debts: Ld. A.R. submitted that bad debts had been written off by assessee in its books of accounts and, therefore, its case was squarely covered by the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 placed at paper book 39 of compilation of judgements. Ld. A.R. further relied upon the case law of Auto Meters Ltd. 292 ITR 345 decided by Hon'ble Delhi High Court placed a paper book pages 42-43. Inviting our attention to A.O.'s objection in disallowing the write off of bad debts, Ld. A.R. submitted that the A.O. had disallowed the claim holding…

M/S Monarch Networth Finserve Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 13 (3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6485/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6485/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Monarch Networth Finserve Income Tax Officer-13(3)(1) 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan Private Limited (Earlier Known As M/S Ravisha Financial M.K. Road, Churchgate बनाम/ Services Private Ltd.) Mumbai-400 020 901/902, Atlanta Centre Vs. Sonawala Lane, Opp. Udyog Bhavan, Goregaon East Mumbai-400 063 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-4982-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Paranjpe - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma - Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…1 M/s. Monarch Networth Finserve Pvt.Ltd. Assessment Year: 2014-15 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “एक-सद"मामला” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी अमरजीत िसंह, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.6485/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s. Monarch Networth Finserve Income Tax Officer-13(3)(1) 2nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan Private Limited (earlier known as M/s Ravisha financial M.K. Road, Churchgat…

DCIT, CC- 8(1), Mumbai vs. Nirshilp Securities Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 6321/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2021AY 2014-15
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…basis and bring these amounts to tax net. Hence, the advisory of the NSEL not to allow the bad debts claim would be legally untenable owing to the provisions of the Act, Circular of the CBDT and ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. v. CIT (323 ITR 397). 30. Further, we have also perused the order in the case of M/s Omni Lens Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 2818/Ahd./2010 wherein the matter was referred back to the file of the AO to examine the issue of speculation/non- speculation business after taking note of crucial aspect of actual delivery of the commodity, if any, as claimed and to ascertain as to h…

ACIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi vs. National Projects Construction Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 102/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, National Projects Constructions Vs. Circle-17(2), Corporation Ltd, New Delhi 30-31, Raja House, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan: Aaacr6117Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pramita M. Bishwas, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(2)Section 37

…d AO disallowed the above claim that the assessee has not produced the relevant details of old outstanding debts, therefore, he disallowed the same. The ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee following the decision of the Supreme Court in TRF Ltd Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 holding that when the assessee has written off the above sum, debts are already taken into income in earlier years, it is allowable. Nothing new was argued by the ld DR and the ld AR also reiterated the arguments before the ld CIT(A). We find that when the assessee has written off a debt in its books of account, which was taken into computation o…