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. M/S Maneesh Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed

ITA 4024/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Bairagra-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Jha – Ld.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153(1)(a)

…claimed that the conditions of Sec. 36(1)(vii) r.w.s. 36(2) were duly fulfilled and the claim was in accordance with law. Reliance was placed on CBDT Circular No.12/2016 dated 30/05/2016 which, after considering Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in TRF Limited (323 ITR 397; 09/02/2010), clarified that after 01/04/1989, for allowing deduction for the amount of any bad-debt or part thereof u/s 36(1)(vii), it would not be necessary for assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It was enough if the debts were written-off as irrecoverable in the books of account. 8.4.3 The Ld. CIT(A) concur…

Mr. Jay Ashkaran Shah, Mumbia vs. Income Tax Officer 18(1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 5596/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 5596/मुं/2019 ("न. व .2014-15) Mr. Jay Ashkaran Shah, 7, Kolbhat Lane, Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai 400 002 Pan: Aykps9495B ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer 18(1)(5), Earnest House, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad
Section 28(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

…see wrote off irrecoverable amounts as bad debts. The assessee has written off bad debts in accordance with the provisions of section 36(1)(vii) of the Act and judgement rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of TRF Ltd vs. CIT reported as 323 ITR 397. The Assessing Officer rejected assessee’s claim of write off of bad debts stating it to be premature. 3.1. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 25/12/2016 the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) placing reliance on the decision in the case of ACIT vs. A.U Financial India Ltd. reported as 102 taxmann.com 290 (Jaipur-Trib.) and…

Covalense Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 372/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2013-14 Covalense Technologies Vs. Dcit, Private Limited, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaccc 7902 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Prasad Putcha Revenue By: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/04/2021 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am.:

For Appellant: Shri Prasad PutchaFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Covalense Technologies Vs. DCIT, Private Limited, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AACCC 7902 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Prasad Putcha Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of hearing: 18/02/2021 Date of pronouncement: 29/04/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0220/15-16/DCIT, Circle- 1(2)/CI…

Shri. Hanuman International Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 25 (3) (4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 4450/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 4450/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2012-13) Shri Hanuman International Corporation, C-201, Eastern Court, Intersection Of – Tejpal Road & Parleshwar Road, Vile Parle (East), Mumbai 400 057 Pan: Aaafh 0152Q ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer,Ward 25(3)(4), C-10/605, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai 400 051. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Shreeram BajajFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay J. Sethi
Section 28Section 3Section 36(1)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “एस एम सी” , मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 4450/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2012-13) Shri Hanuman International Corporation, C-201, Eastern Court, Intersection of – Tejpal Road and Parleshwar Road, Vile Parle (East), Mumbai 400 057 PAN: AAAFH 0152Q ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer,Ward 25(3)(4), C-10/605, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai 400 051. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri Shreeram Bajaj ""त…

Vinay Kumar Mundra HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO-31(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, impugned order is set-side and the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5328/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanआअसं. 5328/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2015-16) Vinay Kumar Mundra Huf, 902, Rajendra Ratna, Mahesh Nagar, S.V.Road, Goregaon West, Mumbai 400 062. Pan:Aafhv2417R ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer 31(3)(5), Mumbai ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Akshay J. Shah Revenue By : Shri Sanjay J. Sethi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 09/03/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/03/2021 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Shri Akshay J. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay J. Sethi
Section 143(3)

…lier year and has claimed loss in the impugned assessment year only. The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of TRF 4 आअसं. 5328/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2015-16) Ltd. Vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397 to contend that write off of bad debts has to be allowed in the year of claim. 5. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. We have also considered the decisions and documents on record, on which ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee has placed reliance. The assessee has claimed…

ITO 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Dhoot Industrial Finance Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 378/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanito-3(1)(2) Dhoot Industrial Finance Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 666, 6Th Floor, 504, Raheja Centre, Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, 214, Free Press Journal Road, Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaacd 1836 A (Revenue) : (Assessee) & Cross Objection No.240/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.378/Mum/2019) (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Dhoot Industrial Finance Pvt. Ltd. Ito-3(1)(2) Room No. 666, 6Th Floor, 504, Raheja Centre, Vs. 214, Free Press Journal Road, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Narimanpoint, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacd 1836 A (Assessee) : (Revenue) Revenue By : Shri Vidhyadhar V. Assessee By : Shri M. Subramanian : 18.03.2021 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 18.03.2021 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal By The Revenue & Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) In Appeal No. Cit(A)-8/It-616/2016-17 Vide Order Dated 20.11.2018. The Assessment Was Framed By The Ito-3(1)(2), Mumbai U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15 Vide His Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar V
Section 143(3)

…unsel of the assessee stated that the amount of Rs.1,58,19,016/- was not received by the assessee and claimed the same as bad debt. Hence, he claimed that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT [2010] 323 ITR 397 (SC), wherein it is held that once the assessee has made written off in the books of accounts, the tax paid has to establish that the debt has actually become irrecoverable. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR relied on the assessment order. 4 ITA No.378/M/19 & CO No. 240/M/19(AY: 2014-15) ITO vs. Dhoot Industrial Finance Pvt. Ltd. 6. We note that…

Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(1), Gurgaon

ITA 7510/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Deepark Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 92C(3)

…written off u/s 37 28 ITA No.7509/Del./2017 ITA No.7510/Del./2017 of the Act and taxpayer is not required to prove that the advances written off is irrecoverable as per section 37(1) of the Act. 46. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) held that, “After 1st April, 1989 it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee.” 47. The taxpayer has given complete detail of advances given at page 30 of the convenience paper book in tabulate…

Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(1), Gurgaon

ITA 7509/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Deepark Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144CSection 92C(3)

…written off u/s 37 28 ITA No.7509/Del./2017 ITA No.7510/Del./2017 of the Act and taxpayer is not required to prove that the advances written off is irrecoverable as per section 37(1) of the Act. 46. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) held that, “After 1st April, 1989 it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee.” 47. The taxpayer has given complete detail of advances given at page 30 of the convenience paper book in tabulate…

The ACIT 1(1), Ujjain vs. M/S Parag Fans & Cooling Systems Ltd., Dewas

In the result appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 562/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON'BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.561 & 562/Ind/2018 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 Ms Parag Fans & Cooling ACIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. System Pvt. Ltd, Plot No.1/2, A.B, 1B/3A, Ujjain Industrial Estate No.1, A.B. Road, Dewas (MP) (Revenue ) (Appellant) PAN No.AACCP1895K Revenue by Shri Harshit Bari, Sr.DR Appellant by Shri S.S. Deshpande, CA Date of Hearing 07.01.2021 Date of Pronouncement 09.02.2021 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above caption…

The ACIT 1(1), Ujjain vs. M/S Parag Fans & Cooling Systems Ltd., Dewas

In the result appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 561/IND/2018[12-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Feb 2021

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON'BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.561 & 562/Ind/2018 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 Ms Parag Fans & Cooling ACIT, Circle-1(1), Vs. System Pvt. Ltd, Plot No.1/2, A.B, 1B/3A, Ujjain Industrial Estate No.1, A.B. Road, Dewas (MP) (Revenue ) (Appellant) PAN No.AACCP1895K Revenue by Shri Harshit Bari, Sr.DR Appellant by Shri S.S. Deshpande, CA Date of Hearing 07.01.2021 Date of Pronouncement 09.02.2021 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above caption…

ACIT Ltu 2, Chennai vs. Nlc India Limited, Neyveli

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both assessment years are dismissed

ITA 952/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 868 & 869/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, (Formerly Known As Neyveli V. Company Circle Vi(4), Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Chennai. Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 952 & 953/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, M/S. Nlc India Ltd., Company Circle Vi(4), V. (Formerly Known As Neyveli Chennai. Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ca : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, CA
Section 14ASection 80I

…e Learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the Appellant is entitled to deduction on account of any debt written off as irrecoverable in the books of account as can be inferred from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. v CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] and the accounting and tax treatment of the Appellant in not recognizing the revenue is equivalent to the accounting and tax treatment of recognizing the revenue and simultaneously writing off the same as bad debt. Thus, in view of the settled law [CIT v. Sarkar Builders (2015) 375 hR 392 (SC)] that an assessee should not be prejudiced by t…

ACIT Ltu 2, Chennai vs. Nlc India Limited, Neyveli

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both assessment years are dismissed

ITA 953/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 868 & 869/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, (Formerly Known As Neyveli V. Company Circle Vi(4), Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Chennai. Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 952 & 953/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, M/S. Nlc India Ltd., Company Circle Vi(4), V. (Formerly Known As Neyveli Chennai. Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ca : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, CA
Section 14ASection 80I

…e Learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the Appellant is entitled to deduction on account of any debt written off as irrecoverable in the books of account as can be inferred from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. v CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] and the accounting and tax treatment of the Appellant in not recognizing the revenue is equivalent to the accounting and tax treatment of recognizing the revenue and simultaneously writing off the same as bad debt. Thus, in view of the settled law [CIT v. Sarkar Builders (2015) 375 hR 392 (SC)] that an assessee should not be prejudiced by t…

Nlc India Ltd., Neyveli vs. DCIT Ltu II, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both assessment years are dismissed

ITA 869/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 868 & 869/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, (Formerly Known As Neyveli V. Company Circle Vi(4), Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Chennai. Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 952 & 953/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, M/S. Nlc India Ltd., Company Circle Vi(4), V. (Formerly Known As Neyveli Chennai. Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ca : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, CA
Section 14ASection 80I

…e Learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the Appellant is entitled to deduction on account of any debt written off as irrecoverable in the books of account as can be inferred from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. v CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] and the accounting and tax treatment of the Appellant in not recognizing the revenue is equivalent to the accounting and tax treatment of recognizing the revenue and simultaneously writing off the same as bad debt. Thus, in view of the settled law [CIT v. Sarkar Builders (2015) 375 hR 392 (SC)] that an assessee should not be prejudiced by t…

Nlc India Ltd., Neyveli vs. DCIT Ltu II, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both assessment years are dismissed

ITA 868/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 868 & 869/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Nlc India Ltd., The Dcit, (Formerly Known As Neyveli V. Company Circle Vi(4), Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Chennai. Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 952 & 953/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, M/S. Nlc India Ltd., Company Circle Vi(4), V. (Formerly Known As Neyveli Chennai. Lignite Corporation Ltd.), Block-1, Corporate Office, Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. Pan: Aaacn1121C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, Ca : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Raghavan Ramabadran, CA
Section 14ASection 80I

…e Learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the Appellant is entitled to deduction on account of any debt written off as irrecoverable in the books of account as can be inferred from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. v CIT [(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC)] and the accounting and tax treatment of the Appellant in not recognizing the revenue is equivalent to the accounting and tax treatment of recognizing the revenue and simultaneously writing off the same as bad debt. Thus, in view of the settled law [CIT v. Sarkar Builders (2015) 375 hR 392 (SC)] that an assessee should not be prejudiced by t…

M/S Sumeru Enterproses, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 888/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agrarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…ulfilled both the conditions prescribed in the statue for allow ability of the expense. Under the circumstances the expense so claimed by the assessee deserves to be allowed. 25. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: 1) 323 ITR 397 (SC) T.R.F. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax: Bad Debt- Law after April 1,1989- Assessee only to establish that debt was written off- Not necessary to establish that debt in fact had become irrecoverable to establish that debt in fact had become irrecoverable- Income Tax Act,1961, s.36(1)(vii). 2) 53 DTR 120 CIT &Anr. vs. Krone Communication L…

M/S Sumeru Enterproses, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 887/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agrarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…ulfilled both the conditions prescribed in the statue for allow ability of the expense. Under the circumstances the expense so claimed by the assessee deserves to be allowed. 25. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: 1) 323 ITR 397 (SC) T.R.F. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax: Bad Debt- Law after April 1,1989- Assessee only to establish that debt was written off- Not necessary to establish that debt in fact had become irrecoverable to establish that debt in fact had become irrecoverable- Income Tax Act,1961, s.36(1)(vii). 2) 53 DTR 120 CIT &Anr. vs. Krone Communication L…

M/S Sumeru Enterproses, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-4, Jaipur

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

ITA 886/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jan 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agrarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…ulfilled both the conditions prescribed in the statue for allow ability of the expense. Under the circumstances the expense so claimed by the assessee deserves to be allowed. 25. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: 1) 323 ITR 397 (SC) T.R.F. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax: Bad Debt- Law after April 1,1989- Assessee only to establish that debt was written off- Not necessary to establish that debt in fact had become irrecoverable to establish that debt in fact had become irrecoverable- Income Tax Act,1961, s.36(1)(vii). 2) 53 DTR 120 CIT &Anr. vs. Krone Communication L…

Pranava Electronics Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/147/2016HC Karnataka07 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 260Section 260ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 37(1)

…business of education and training in technical and other fields'. 3 (b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, tribunal erred in denying the bad debts written off as allowable deductions in view of the decision in TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397? (c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in not taking into consideration the evidences filed by the assessee to substantiate that the interest amount was offered for tax in the earlier years and portion of the debt was taken for computing the income of the assessee. (d) Whether in the facts a…

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S Shriram Chits (Kar) Pvt Ltd

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/66/2012HC Karnataka07 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(1)Section 260Section 260A

…f the tribunal in the case of assessee and by order dated 06.09.2010 held that bid loss is an allowable deduction. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) with regard to the bad debts placed reliance on decision of the Supreme Court in TRF LTD. VS. CIT, 323 ITR 396 (SC) and held that an addition made to the bad debts was contrary to the aforesaid decision. Accordingly, the deduction was allowed. The revenue thereupon filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 6 (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The tribunal by an order dated 31.10.2011 by placing reliance on its e…

The DCIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad vs. Edelweiss Broking Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 446/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 48Section 73

…'ble Ahmedabad ITAT in Appellant's own case for A.Y. 2008-09 (ITA No. 1531/Ahd/2011) wherein Hon'ble ITAT vide its order dated 6th November, 2015 has held as under: "5. The CIT(A) deletes this bad debts disallowance after quoting case law of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) to the fact that it is not necessary to prove the same to have actually become bad as per the relevant law amended from 01.04.1989. The CIT(A) comes to latter aspect (supra). The assessee submitted in the lower appellate proceedings that it had already credited its brokerage income in profit and loss account thereby offering it for taxation.…