What is TRF Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

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

How many judgments cite TRF Ltd. v. CIT?

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

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

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

TRF Ltd. v. CIT (323 ITR 397)

Bina Metal Way Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Asansol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2121/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2121/Kol/2014

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: None

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(7)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.2121/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bina Metal Way Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Kolkata. AH-138, Sector-II, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700091. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCB 1511 D .. (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by : None. सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 13/06/2017 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/ 07/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The captioned appea…

DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Adventz Investments and Holdings Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2203/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jun 2017AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 143(2)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…d interest income in previous years and the same has been written off during the year under consideration. The CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and in the case of TRF 3 Ltd. reported in 323 ITR 397 allowed the deduction to the assessee under section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2) of the Act. The relevant portion of which is reproduced here- in-below: “I have considered facts of the case. The appellant is a non- banking finance company registered with RBI. It has, in the earlier years, given loans to the three parties i.e. ENSO Ltd., Din…

DCIT, Circle-33, Kolkata vs. M/S. India Docking & Engineering Co., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2169/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jun 2017AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 143(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘A’, KOLKATA (Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, A.M. & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.) Assessment Year : 2010-11 D.C.I.T. Cir-33, Kolkata, Vs M/s. India Docking & Income Tax Office, 10B, Engineering Co., Middleton Row, 3rd Floor, C/o. K.J. Shah & Co., Kalyan Kolkata - 700071 Bhawan, 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata - 700020 PAN No. AAAFI7900B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Revenue by : Shri Sourabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Assessee by : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate Date of Hearing : 18.04.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 30-06-2017 ORDER Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM This appeal by the rev…

ACIT, Chennai vs. V.Krishnamurthy, Chennai

In the result, Revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 424/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri. G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…such debt has been written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee as it undisputedly was, in the instant case, and as held in CIT Vs Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. [262 ITR 97] (Guj) and a catena of other judgements including TRF Ltd. Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 SC. In view of the above discussion, the AO’s addition of Rs. 26,55,088/- on account of disallowance of bad debts is directed to the deleted. Accordingly, this ground is also allowed.” with these observations the CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the Revenue has filed an appeal before the Tribunal. Be…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters Private Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1828/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A

Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘ ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI ‘B‘ BENCH, CHENNAI "ीचं"पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं"ीधु"वु"आर.एलरे"डी,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner of Income M/s. Green House Promoters Tax vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle II(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN AACCG 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by :…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters Private Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1796/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A

Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘ ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI ‘B‘ BENCH, CHENNAI "ीचं"पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं"ीधु"वु"आर.एलरे"डी,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner of Income M/s. Green House Promoters Tax vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle II(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN AACCG 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by :…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters P. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1785/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S. Green House Promoters Tax Vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle Ii(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan Aaccg 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, C.A

Section 194CSection 40Section 4U

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘ ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI ‘B‘ BENCH, CHENNAI "ीचं"पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं"ीधु"वु"आर.एलरे"डी,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1785, 1796 & 1828/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11, 2011-12 & 2009-2010. The Assistant Commissioner of Income M/s. Green House Promoters Tax vs. Pvt. Ltd, Company Circle II(1) No.4,Rama Rao Street, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN AACCG 2333B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by :…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Shriram Insight Share Brokers Ltd., Chennai

In the result appeal of the assessee as well as that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3080/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234DSection 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2747/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/s. Shriram Insight Share Brokers Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Ltd, Income Tax, Mookambika Complex, Corporate Circle 6(1), No.4, Lady Desika Road, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. PAN: AAACI2727H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.3080/Mds…

Shriram Insight Share Brokers Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result appeal of the assessee as well as that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2747/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234DSection 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2747/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/s. Shriram Insight Share Brokers Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Ltd, Income Tax, Mookambika Complex, Corporate Circle 6(1), No.4, Lady Desika Road, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. PAN: AAACI2727H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.3080/Mds…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Shriram City Union Finance Co. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 726/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.506/Mds/2016 "नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Mr.R.Sivaraman, Adv

Section 37Section 45

…ax law does not envisage any further enquiry into the matter by the assessing officer as ITA Nos.506 & 726/Mds/2016 :- 18 -: held by the courts in a number of cases. In particular, we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in TRF Ltd., vs CIT, Ranchi 323 ITR 397 in which it has been held that for allowance of bad debts, it is enough if bad debts are written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee and it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt has in fact become irrecoverable. 9. For the foregoing reasons, we have no hesitation in upholding the deletion of Rs.13,57,58,000…

Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 506/CHNY/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.506/Mds/2016 "नधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Mr.R.Sivaraman, Adv

Section 37Section 45

…ax law does not envisage any further enquiry into the matter by the assessing officer as ITA Nos.506 & 726/Mds/2016 :- 18 -: held by the courts in a number of cases. In particular, we may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in TRF Ltd., vs CIT, Ranchi 323 ITR 397 in which it has been held that for allowance of bad debts, it is enough if bad debts are written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee and it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt has in fact become irrecoverable. 9. For the foregoing reasons, we have no hesitation in upholding the deletion of Rs.13,57,58,000…

Galaxy Medicare, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 34/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2011-12

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

…e interest of the business was a genuine loss suffered by the assessee and hence, allowable deduction to the assessee. 15. Ld D.R. relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 16. I find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) while adjudicating a similar claim concluded as under: "This position in law is well-settled. 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........." 17. In the instant case…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Mrs. Sadhna Sachdeva, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 8 and 9 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3701/DEL/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2017AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Sadhna Sachdeva, Circle-26(1), Prop M/S. S Tulip, 112-A, New Delhi Ekta Enclave, New Delhi Pan:Abips7481A (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sachdeva, Vs. Acit, Prop M/S. S Tulip, 112-A, Circle-26(1), Ekta Enclave, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Abips7481A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev, Sapra, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36Section 80H

…plication for write off. The assessee is further written off the above amount in the profit and loss account by striking of the balance of the party from the books of the assessee. In view of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of TRF Ltd versus CIT 323 ITR 397 the claim of the assessee is allowable. In view of this we reverse the order of the lower authorities on this ground and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee with respect to allowance of bad debts of Rs. 8 138 7721/–.. In the result ground No. 8 and 9 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed. 13. Ground No. 10 of the appeal is general in…

M/S. Tata Chemical Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT RG. 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee and Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5897/MUM/2004[1997-1998]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 1997-1998

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas and Shri Atul T SuraiyaFor Respondent: Mrs Vidisha Kalra

Section 35E

…ad debts written off). This issue is covered in favour of the Assessee by the Coordinate Bench decision for the assessment year 1996-97 in ITA No.5728/Mum/2004 dated 17.8.2007 and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT [323 ITR 397]. It is not in dispute that these amounts were due to the Assessee Company from its distributors and agents and these balances were written off in the books of accounts. Therefore, respectfully following the same decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra), we allow the claim of the Assessee. This ground is allow…

Systematix Shares and Stocks India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2870/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2870/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Systematix Shares & Stocks V. The Asst. Commissioner Of India Ltd., Income Tax, 2Nd Floor, Jk Somani Building, Company Circle – Vi(4), British Hotel Lane, Chennai-34. Fort Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaecs8827N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N R Suresh, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2017

For Appellant: Shri N R Suresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 36(1)(vii)

…ion. 2) Non-payment of purchase consideration of shares by the clients of the assessees. On the first instance, by virtue of Section 36(1)(vii) r.w.s 36(2) of the Act, and the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case TRF Limited vs. CIT reported in 323 ITR 397 it is clear that the assessee is entitled to claim the amount of brokerage commission not received as bad debt, if the same was treated as income earlier and written off in the books of accounts during the relevant assessment year when the debt was considered as not receivable. 9 I.T.A. No.2870/Mds/2016 On the second instance, though the cl…

M/S Akzo Nobel India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-10, Kolkata

In the result appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 531/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Singh & Shri Manoneet Dalal (AR)For Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92

…2 raised by the revenue. The DRP has placed reliance on the amendment to the law and the CBDT Circular. The amendment to the law and CBDT circular which were considered by the DRP was also considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC) and it was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that w.e.f. 01.04.1987 it is no longer necessary for a claim for deduction on account of bad debts written off that the assessee should establish that the debt in question has become bad. In view of the above legal position we dismiss ground no.2 raised by the revenue. 56. Ground no.3 has already…

DCIT, Cir-10, Kolkata vs. M/S Akzo Nobel India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 335/KOL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Singh & Shri Manoneet Dalal (AR)For Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92

…2 raised by the revenue. The DRP has placed reliance on the amendment to the law and the CBDT Circular. The amendment to the law and CBDT circular which were considered by the DRP was also considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC) and it was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that w.e.f. 01.04.1987 it is no longer necessary for a claim for deduction on account of bad debts written off that the assessee should establish that the debt in question has become bad. In view of the above legal position we dismiss ground no.2 raised by the revenue. 56. Ground no.3 has already…

S.K. Silks, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 14(3), Mumbai

ITA 3616/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Ram Lal Negiआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3615/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3616/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./351/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. S.K. Silks Addl Cit, -14 (3) 9, Chatrabhuj House, 285 Princess Street Earnest House, 5Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 002. Nariman Point,Mumbai. Pan:Aaafs 1035 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Vishwas Mundhe-Dr Assessee By: Dr. P. Daniel

For Appellant: Dr. P. DanielFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe-DR

Section 254(1)Section 36Section 80H

…आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “ ई” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं, राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3615/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अ…

S.K. Silks, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 14(3), Mumbai

ITA 351/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Ram Lal Negiआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3615/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3616/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./351/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. S.K. Silks Addl Cit, -14 (3) 9, Chatrabhuj House, 285 Princess Street Earnest House, 5Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 002. Nariman Point,Mumbai. Pan:Aaafs 1035 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Vishwas Mundhe-Dr Assessee By: Dr. P. Daniel

For Appellant: Dr. P. DanielFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe-DR

Section 254(1)Section 36Section 80H

…आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “ ई” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं, राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3615/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अ…

Standard Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3615/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…,35,100/- (Rs.47,60,185 /-+ Rs.67,74,915/-) to the total income of the assessee. 4 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 (SC) and deleted the addition of Rs.47,60,185/- made by the AO towards bad debts. However, as the assessee failed to file the details before the AO, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of Rs.67,74,915/- made by the AO towards advances written off. 5. Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submits that ‘the said advances / deposits had…

TRF Ltd. v. CIT

What is TRF Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing TRF Ltd. v. CIT

Bina Metal Way Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Asansol, Kolkata

DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Adventz Investments and Holdings Ltd., Kolkata

DCIT, Circle-33, Kolkata vs. M/S. India Docking & Engineering Co., Kolkata

ACIT, Chennai vs. V.Krishnamurthy, Chennai

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters Private Ltd., Chennai

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters Private Ltd., Chennai

ACIT, Chennai vs. Green House Promoters P. Ltd., Chennai

DCIT, Chennai vs. Shriram Insight Share Brokers Ltd., Chennai

Shriram Insight Share Brokers Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

DCIT, Chennai vs. Shriram City Union Finance Co. Ltd., Chennai

Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

Galaxy Medicare, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Mrs. Sadhna Sachdeva, New Delhi

M/S. Tata Chemical Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. CIT RG. 1, Mumbai

Systematix Shares and Stocks India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Chennai

M/S Akzo Nobel India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-10, Kolkata

DCIT, Cir-10, Kolkata vs. M/S Akzo Nobel India Ltd., Kolkata

S.K. Silks, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 14(3), Mumbai

S.K. Silks, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 14(3), Mumbai

Standard Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(3), Mumbai