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

M/S Industrial Filters & Fabrics Private Limited, Indore vs. The ACIT 2(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 754/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tstanding and the said amount was written off in accordance with the provisions contained in Sec.36 (1)(VII) of the Act. The CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal has taken into consideration the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT :(2010) 323 ITR 397 and recorded a finding of fact that the said amount having become irrecoverable, the assessee has rightly written off the same and merely because the assessee has not filed any claim, that could not be considered to be a ground for 4 disallowing a bad debt. 6.1 Admittedly, the amounts were lying outstanding for the last couple of years and the a…

M/S Industrial Filters and Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT 5(1), Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 404/IND/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tstanding and the said amount was written off in accordance with the provisions contained in Sec.36 (1)(VII) of the Act. The CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal has taken into consideration the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT :(2010) 323 ITR 397 and recorded a finding of fact that the said amount having become irrecoverable, the assessee has rightly written off the same and merely because the assessee has not filed any claim, that could not be considered to be a ground for 4 disallowing a bad debt. 6.1 Admittedly, the amounts were lying outstanding for the last couple of years and the a…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Chatrapati Sambhaji Raje Sakhar Udyog Ltd., Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 163/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Modi
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…suppliers. In so far as writing off of bad debts Rs.48,21,516/- is concerned, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has granted relief to the assessee by following the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT reported on 323 ITR 397. The Hon’ble Apex Court has held that after the amendment of section 36(1)(vii) w.e.f. 01-04-1989, 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. Thus, in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supr…

Darshan Roadlines P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 186/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.186/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Darshan Roadlines Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ Income Tax-6(2)(1) 301, Commercial Manor 4Th Cross Clive Road, Masjid (E) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Vs. Mumbai-400 009 Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccd-8064-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Sunil Natha, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ram Tiwari, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ITA No.186/Mum/2017 Darshan Roadlines Private Limited Assessment Year-2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “डी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.186/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Darshan Roadlines Private Limited Assistant Commissioner of बनाम/ Income Tax-6(2)(1) 301, Commercial Manor 4th Cross Clive Road, Masjid (E) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Vs. Mumbai-400 009 Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AACCD-8064…

Lg Electronics India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 3613/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

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

For Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3612 & 3613/Del/2017 Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 LG Electronics India (P) Ltd., ACIT, Circle- Noida, A- Wing (3rd Floor), D- 3, Noida. District Center Saket, Vs. New Delhi. PAN : AAACL1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent) : Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv. Shri Ramit Katyal, Adv. Department by : Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR : 19-04-2018 Date of hearing Date of pronouncement : 18-07-2018 O R D E R PER R.…

Lg Electronics India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 3612/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

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

For Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 251(1)(a)Section 40Section 80JSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3612 & 3613/Del/2017 Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 LG Electronics India (P) Ltd., ACIT, Circle- Noida, A- Wing (3rd Floor), D- 3, Noida. District Center Saket, Vs. New Delhi. PAN : AAACL1745Q (Appellant) (Respondent) : Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv. Shri Ramit Katyal, Adv. Department by : Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR : 19-04-2018 Date of hearing Date of pronouncement : 18-07-2018 O R D E R PER R.…

DCIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Neo Structo Construction Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3476/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DRFor Respondent: Shri Niraj D.Sheth, AR
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “F” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री जी. मंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3476/Mum/2016 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2011-12) The Dy. Commissionern of M/s Neo Structo Income Tax 14(1)(1), Construction Ltd., 312 3 rd Room No.460, 4th Floor, Floor, Gemstar Commercial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Complex, Rameshchandra Mumbai-400 020 Lane Extn., Malad (West) Mumbai-400 064 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1187/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…tholic Syrian Bank Ltd., 267 ITR 52, ITAT Cochin Special Bench; iii) State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur v/s DCIT, [2001[ 74 ITD 203 (Jaipur Bench); iv) Bank of Baroda v/s JCIT, ITAT “B” Bench, Mumbai, for A.Y. 1996–97, 1997–98 and 2000–01; v) TRF Ltd. v/s CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) and Vijaya Bank v/s CIT (SC) 323 ITR 167. 4.4. Even otherwise, in view of the amendment in the taxation laws with effect from 01st April, 1989, the requirement 22 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 of demonstrating that the debts has become bad has been dispensed with and only requirement remains that it should be “w…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1188/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…tholic Syrian Bank Ltd., 267 ITR 52, ITAT Cochin Special Bench; iii) State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur v/s DCIT, [2001[ 74 ITD 203 (Jaipur Bench); iv) Bank of Baroda v/s JCIT, ITAT “B” Bench, Mumbai, for A.Y. 1996–97, 1997–98 and 2000–01; v) TRF Ltd. v/s CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) and Vijaya Bank v/s CIT (SC) 323 ITR 167. 4.4. Even otherwise, in view of the amendment in the taxation laws with effect from 01st April, 1989, the requirement 22 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 of demonstrating that the debts has become bad has been dispensed with and only requirement remains that it should be “w…

Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 469/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…tholic Syrian Bank Ltd., 267 ITR 52, ITAT Cochin Special Bench; iii) State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur v/s DCIT, [2001[ 74 ITD 203 (Jaipur Bench); iv) Bank of Baroda v/s JCIT, ITAT “B” Bench, Mumbai, for A.Y. 1996–97, 1997–98 and 2000–01; v) TRF Ltd. v/s CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) and Vijaya Bank v/s CIT (SC) 323 ITR 167. 4.4. Even otherwise, in view of the amendment in the taxation laws with effect from 01st April, 1989, the requirement 22 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 of demonstrating that the debts has become bad has been dispensed with and only requirement remains that it should be “w…

Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 468/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…tholic Syrian Bank Ltd., 267 ITR 52, ITAT Cochin Special Bench; iii) State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur v/s DCIT, [2001[ 74 ITD 203 (Jaipur Bench); iv) Bank of Baroda v/s JCIT, ITAT “B” Bench, Mumbai, for A.Y. 1996–97, 1997–98 and 2000–01; v) TRF Ltd. v/s CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) and Vijaya Bank v/s CIT (SC) 323 ITR 167. 4.4. Even otherwise, in view of the amendment in the taxation laws with effect from 01st April, 1989, the requirement 22 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 of demonstrating that the debts has become bad has been dispensed with and only requirement remains that it should be “w…

Allied Digital Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3569/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Allied Digital Services Ltd. Dcit, Cc- 3, 13A, 13Th Floor, Earnest House, Mumbai. Ncpa, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaaca5509K Appellant Respondent M/S Allied Digital Services Ltd. Dcit, Cc- 3, 13A, 13Th Floor, Earnest House, Mumbai. Ncpa, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaaca5509K Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rakesh Joshi (Ar) Respondent By : Shri R.P. Meena (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 03.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.06.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income –Tax Act Per Pawan Singh;

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Allied Digital Services Ltd. DCIT, CC- 3, 13A, 13th Floor, Earnest House, Mumbai. NCPA, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACA5509K Appellant Respondent M/s Allied Digital Services Ltd. DCIT, CC- 3, 13A, 13th Floor, Earnest House, Mumbai. NCPA, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACA5509K Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Joshi (AR) Respondent by : Shri R.P. Meena (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing : 03.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 29.06.2018 Order Under…

DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata vs. M/S Ace Glass Containers Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the both these appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1432/KOL/2014[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A Nos. 1431&1432/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2001-02 & 2003-04 Acit, Circle-5 (2), Kolkata. -Vs- M/S Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Ltd. (Formerly Known Ace Glass Containers Ltd.) [Pan: Aadca 4384 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Srihari, CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM ] I.T.A Nos. 1431&1432/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2001-02 & 2003-04 ACIT, Circle-5 (2), Kolkata. -vs- M/s Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Ltd. (formerly known ACE Glass Containers Ltd.) [PAN: AADCA 4384 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT For the Revenue : Shri D.S.Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 15.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 27.06.2018 ORDER Per J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM Both the appeals are f…

DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata vs. M/S Ace Glass Containers Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the both these appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1431/KOL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A Nos. 1431&1432/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2001-02 & 2003-04 Acit, Circle-5 (2), Kolkata. -Vs- M/S Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Ltd. (Formerly Known Ace Glass Containers Ltd.) [Pan: Aadca 4384 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Srihari, CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM ] I.T.A Nos. 1431&1432/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2001-02 & 2003-04 ACIT, Circle-5 (2), Kolkata. -vs- M/s Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Ltd. (formerly known ACE Glass Containers Ltd.) [PAN: AADCA 4384 P] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT For the Revenue : Shri D.S.Damle, FCA Date of Hearing : 15.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 27.06.2018 ORDER Per J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM Both the appeals are f…

Carol Info Service Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 14, Mumbai

In the result, appeals are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 756/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…at the amount of bad debts range from Rs.800 to Rs. 4 lakhs. Since the assessee was unable to recover the old dues, assessee was justified in claiming the same as bad debts. The issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of T.R.F. Ltd., 323 ITR 397 wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court held that bad debts is allowable in the M/s. Carol Info Services Ltd., year of written off and assessee is not required to prove that bad debts has occurred in the year under consideration. 6. We further observe that it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt infact has become irrecoverable and i…

Avdel (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3260/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Avdel (India) Private Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income बिधम/ 169, Backbay Reclamation, Tax-1(1), Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabca3977E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Alok Saksena, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 36(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 3260/Mum/2014 AY. 2008-09 M/s Avdel (India) Private Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM M/s Avdel (India) Private Limited Deputy Commissioner of Income बिधम/ 169, Backbay Reclamation, Tax-1(1), Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN No. AABCA3977E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri Alok Saksena, A.R प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R सुनवाई की तायीख / : 15.03.2018 Date of He…

Pyramid Consulting Engineers P.Ltd, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir 3, Thane

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

ITA 6962/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…deductions. However, the remaining amount of ₹ 35,86,523/- was written off as non-recoverable out of the said amount. Now before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397. On the other hand, the learned SR, Departmental Representative retreated the observations made by 7 the AO and CIT(A) and strongly supported the order of the AO and CIT(A). 8. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and gone through the facts and circumstances available on record. In the present case, it is admitted facts that th…

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Onprocess Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1241/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

…(1)(vii) of the Act and he, therefore, disallowed the aforesaid claim. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the impugned disallowance in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debts written off had actually become bad and to allow the claim it is sufficient that the debts are written off in the books of account. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal before us. On Process Technoology India P…

On Process Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-2(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1047/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(i)Section 9(1)(vii)

…(1)(vii) of the Act and he, therefore, disallowed the aforesaid claim. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the impugned disallowance in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debts written off had actually become bad and to allow the claim it is sufficient that the debts are written off in the books of account. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal before us. On Process Technoology India P…

Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 3086/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…e contended that the assessee is not required to demonstrate whether debts have actually become bad or not. In support of his contention, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC). The ld.DR on the other hand relied upon the order of the CIT(A). 73. We have duly considered rival submissions and gone through the record. A perusal of the finding of the ld.CIT(A) recorded in para 7.3 would show that the assessee itself admitted before the ld.CIT(A) that this amount is not allowable under section 36(2) of the Act. In oth…