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 367,154 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

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Thakral Computers Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 713/BANG/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri C.J. Brito, CAFor Respondent: Shri N. Sukumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

…the assessment order whereas the ld. AR of assessee supported the order of CIT(A). He also submitted that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in 323 ITR 397. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that as per the assessment order, this is not the objection of the AO that the debts were not written off in the books of accounts. The objection of the AO is that there is no material supporting the fact that the debt is not recoverable. After the amendment of section 36(1)(iii) w.e.f. 01.04.…

ACIT Cen Cir 21 Cen RG 5, Mumbai vs. Sunteck Wealthmax Capital P. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4977/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar
Section 14A

…nd written off. Following the principles laid down by the Special Bench in the case of Shreyas S. Morakhia (Supra) we hold that assessee satisfied the conditions prescribed under section 36(2). Moreover the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 has already considered that it is not necessary to establish that the debt had in fact had become irrevocable after the provisions were amended w.e.f. 1.4.1989. Following the above principles, since necessary details were already filed before the authorities, we have no hesitation in allowing the ground. AO is directed to allow the bad debt as cl…

Suntech Wealthmax Capital P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 21, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4914/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar
Section 14A

…nd written off. Following the principles laid down by the Special Bench in the case of Shreyas S. Morakhia (Supra) we hold that assessee satisfied the conditions prescribed under section 36(2). Moreover the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 has already considered that it is not necessary to establish that the debt had in fact had become irrevocable after the provisions were amended w.e.f. 1.4.1989. Following the above principles, since necessary details were already filed before the authorities, we have no hesitation in allowing the ground. AO is directed to allow the bad debt as cl…

Satguru Capital & Finance P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(2), Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4564/MUM/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar
Section 14A

…nd written off. Following the principles laid down by the Special Bench in the case of Shreyas S. Morakhia (Supra) we hold that assessee satisfied the conditions prescribed under section 36(2). Moreover the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 has already considered that it is not necessary to establish that the debt had in fact had become irrevocable after the provisions were amended w.e.f. 1.4.1989. Following the above principles, since necessary details were already filed before the authorities, we have no hesitation in allowing the ground. AO is directed to allow the bad debt as cl…

ACIT CC 21 Cen RG 5, Mumbai vs. Satguru Capital and Finance P.Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3672/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar
Section 14A

…nd written off. Following the principles laid down by the Special Bench in the case of Shreyas S. Morakhia (Supra) we hold that assessee satisfied the conditions prescribed under section 36(2). Moreover the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 has already considered that it is not necessary to establish that the debt had in fact had become irrevocable after the provisions were amended w.e.f. 1.4.1989. Following the above principles, since necessary details were already filed before the authorities, we have no hesitation in allowing the ground. AO is directed to allow the bad debt as cl…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Snowman Logistics Ltd., Bengaluru

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

ITA 517/BANG/2017[2012 - 13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2017
For Appellant: Shri K.P. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 36

…sessment order whereas the ld. AR of assessee supported the order of CIT(A). He also submitted that the issue Page 2 of 2 involved was decided by CIT(A) by following the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in 323 ITR 397. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that as per the assessment order, the objection of the AO is this that the assessee company had not taken any effective steps to recover the amount of debts. After the amendment in the provision of section 36 (1) (vii) w.e.f. 01.04.1989, this is not required to be shown by the assessee that th…

ITO, WD-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Merlin Resources (P) Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 383/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2017AY 2009-2010
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)

…de by the assessee as well as the material available on record, the Ld. CIT (A) deleted the disallowance made by the AO on account of assessee’s claim for bad debts written off by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs CIT 323 ITR 397 wherein it was held that the only condition for allowing the deduction on account of bad debts written off as per section 36(1)(vii) as amended from 01.04.1989 is that the relevant debts should be written off in the books of accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) however confirmed the disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A by applying Rule 8D by…

M/S Merlin Resources Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 335/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2017AY 2009-2010
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)

…de by the assessee as well as the material available on record, the Ld. CIT (A) deleted the disallowance made by the AO on account of assessee’s claim for bad debts written off by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs CIT 323 ITR 397 wherein it was held that the only condition for allowing the deduction on account of bad debts written off as per section 36(1)(vii) as amended from 01.04.1989 is that the relevant debts should be written off in the books of accounts of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) however confirmed the disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A by applying Rule 8D by…

DCIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the AY 2008-09 is partly allowed

ITA 2346/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. Mumbai. Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. 6Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. M.K. Road Parekh Marg, Mumba-400020. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. 6Th Floor Aayakar Marg, Churchgate, Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. Mumba-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, Ar Revenue By: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/09/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, DR

…pany as bad debts and subsequently withdrawn by it. 4.2 Before us, the Ld. counsel submits that the assessee-company need not prove that the debt has become bad, if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the books of accounts as held in TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397)(SC). He further submits that the assessee-company had claimed Rs.1,38,95,564/- as bad debts for the captioned assessment year. Out of it, the IPO commission amounting to Rs.79,88,905 was accrued as at March 31st, 2006 and was wrongly reversed to Bad debts account during the captioned assessment year. The same was offered for tax during the asses…

Icici Securities Ltd (Earlier Known As Icici Brokerage Services Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the AY 2008-09 is partly allowed

ITA 1906/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. Mumbai. Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. 6Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. M.K. Road Parekh Marg, Mumba-400020. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. 6Th Floor Aayakar Marg, Churchgate, Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. Mumba-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, Ar Revenue By: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/09/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, DR

…pany as bad debts and subsequently withdrawn by it. 4.2 Before us, the Ld. counsel submits that the assessee-company need not prove that the debt has become bad, if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the books of accounts as held in TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397)(SC). He further submits that the assessee-company had claimed Rs.1,38,95,564/- as bad debts for the captioned assessment year. Out of it, the IPO commission amounting to Rs.79,88,905 was accrued as at March 31st, 2006 and was wrongly reversed to Bad debts account during the captioned assessment year. The same was offered for tax during the asses…

D.C.I.T.4(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Securities Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the AY 2008-09 is partly allowed

ITA 2702/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. Mumbai. Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. 6Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. M.K. Road Parekh Marg, Mumba-400020. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. 6Th Floor Aayakar Marg, Churchgate, Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. Mumba-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, Ar Revenue By: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/09/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, DR

…pany as bad debts and subsequently withdrawn by it. 4.2 Before us, the Ld. counsel submits that the assessee-company need not prove that the debt has become bad, if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the books of accounts as held in TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397)(SC). He further submits that the assessee-company had claimed Rs.1,38,95,564/- as bad debts for the captioned assessment year. Out of it, the IPO commission amounting to Rs.79,88,905 was accrued as at March 31st, 2006 and was wrongly reversed to Bad debts account during the captioned assessment year. The same was offered for tax during the asses…

Icici Securities Ltd ( Earlier Known As Brokerage Services Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the AY 2008-09 is partly allowed

ITA 2437/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. Mumbai. Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. 6Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. M.K. Road Parekh Marg, Mumba-400020. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Icici Securities Ltd. Acit-4(1) Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Vs. 6Th Floor Aayakar Marg, Churchgate, Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. Mumba-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit-4(1) Icici Securities Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. Icici Centre, H.T. Parekh Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaci0996E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, Ar Revenue By: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/09/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. B.C.S. Naik, DR

…pany as bad debts and subsequently withdrawn by it. 4.2 Before us, the Ld. counsel submits that the assessee-company need not prove that the debt has become bad, if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the books of accounts as held in TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397)(SC). He further submits that the assessee-company had claimed Rs.1,38,95,564/- as bad debts for the captioned assessment year. Out of it, the IPO commission amounting to Rs.79,88,905 was accrued as at March 31st, 2006 and was wrongly reversed to Bad debts account during the captioned assessment year. The same was offered for tax during the asses…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 931/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ff. The co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Joint CIT vs. Vijaya Bank in ITA Nos.318 & 331/Bang/2014 dated 22/07/2016, to which both of us, are parties, after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.R.F.Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397) and Vijaya Bank (supra) held as follows: “9.2 We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only ground on which the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made on account of bad debts is that debts have not been written off in the books of account. Similar issue had come up before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1493/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ff. The co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Joint CIT vs. Vijaya Bank in ITA Nos.318 & 331/Bang/2014 dated 22/07/2016, to which both of us, are parties, after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.R.F.Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397) and Vijaya Bank (supra) held as follows: “9.2 We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only ground on which the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made on account of bad debts is that debts have not been written off in the books of account. Similar issue had come up before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Canara Bank, Bangalore

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

ITA 1440/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ff. The co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Joint CIT vs. Vijaya Bank in ITA Nos.318 & 331/Bang/2014 dated 22/07/2016, to which both of us, are parties, after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.R.F.Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397) and Vijaya Bank (supra) held as follows: “9.2 We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only ground on which the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made on account of bad debts is that debts have not been written off in the books of account. Similar issue had come up before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank…

Canara Bank vs. Addl.C.I, .T

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

ITA 979/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ff. The co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Joint CIT vs. Vijaya Bank in ITA Nos.318 & 331/Bang/2014 dated 22/07/2016, to which both of us, are parties, after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.R.F.Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397) and Vijaya Bank (supra) held as follows: “9.2 We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only ground on which the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made on account of bad debts is that debts have not been written off in the books of account. Similar issue had come up before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank…

J.C.I.T vs. M/S Canara Bank

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

ITA 1035/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ff. The co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Joint CIT vs. Vijaya Bank in ITA Nos.318 & 331/Bang/2014 dated 22/07/2016, to which both of us, are parties, after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.R.F.Ltd. vs. CIT (323 ITR 397) and Vijaya Bank (supra) held as follows: “9.2 We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only ground on which the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made on account of bad debts is that debts have not been written off in the books of account. Similar issue had come up before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank…

DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Rnt Plantations Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue (Ground NO

ITA 28/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.28/Kol/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 D.C.I.T, Circle – 4(2), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Rnt Plantations Ltd. 1 & 2, Old Court House Corner, Kolakta – 700 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcr 1876K (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee) Revenue/Department By :Shri Kalyannath, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Assessee By :Smt. Nilima Joshi, Fca सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/07/2017 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/09/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-Iv, Kolkata, Dated 08.10.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961,(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 01.12.2011. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts By Deleting The Addition Of Rs.10,00,192/- On Account Of Cess On Green Leaf Ignoring The Fact That Very Decisions Of The Itat Kolkata, Bases On Which The Issue Was Arbitrated, Has Been Challenged By The Revenue In The Apex Court By Way Of Filing A Slp.

For Appellant: Smt. Nilima Joshi, FCAFor Respondent: Shri KalyanNath, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ent to state that bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee. That is,after 01.04.1989 to claim deduction of bad debt, it is enough if bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee (TRF Ltd. vs. CIT(SC) 323 ITR 397). Therefore, initiation of legal proceedings cannot be the sole and deciding factor while ascertaining as to whether a debt is bad or not. But it is essential that such debt is written off in the Books of Account of the assessee. In this context, the Ld. CIT(A) has examined the report and accounts for F.Y 2008-09 wherein at Schedule ‘16(B)(11)(c)…

Jsw Holdings Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

ITA 714/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Sh Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Smt. Arju Garodia
Section 14A

…red debenture has already been allowed as bad debt written off by this Tribunal while computing the income from business / profession in assessment year 2007-08. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has relied upon the following case laws in this respect: 1. 323 ITR 397 (sc) T.R.F. Ltd v CIT. 2. 155 ITR 152 (SC) CIT Vs. T. Veerabhadra Rao, K. Koteswara Rao & Co. 3. ITA No. 3191/Mum/2010 – Jindal South West holding Ltd v DCIT – assessee own case for assessment year 2007-08 17. We have gone through the order of the Tribunal dated 21.11.2012 passed in ITA No. 3191/Mum/2010 vide which the Tribunal has allowed the…

M/S Mitra Guha Builders (India) Co., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-33(3), Kolkata

In the result ITA NO.1594/Kol/2014 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and C

ITA 1558/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri J.M.Thard, Advocate
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 201Section 40

…ry for the assessee to establish that the debt written off as bad debts should be shown to become bad in view of the statutory amendment to the provision of section 36(1)(vii) of the Act and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited 323 ITR 397 (SC). 26. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) the revenue has raised ground no.2 before the Tribunal. 27. We have heard the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee and the ld. DR. The details of the debts that were written off as bad debts and the year in which the sums were offered as income by the assessee are given in Annexure-II to thi…