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 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 147 Section 14A Section 36(2)Section 148 Section 40(a)(ia)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)section 36(1)(vii)business expediency section 36(1)section 36 commercial expediency revenue expenditure disallowance under section 14a capital expenditure section 28 section 115j section 14a

Judgments citing TRF Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT 4(2), Mumbai vs. Firmenich Aromatics (I) P. Tld, Mumbai

In the result, departmental ground no

ITA 3744/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Dt Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Mrs. Puja Swaroop

Section 145Section 145(3)Section 40A

…at a claim of bed depth is to be allowed in the year in which such bad debt has been written off as irrevocable as the account of the assessee. Therefore, we restore this issue back to the file of AO to decide the issue as per the decision of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397 Supreme Court. 38. In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. 20 M/s Firmenich Aromatics 39. Ground No. 1 relates to disallowance of excess interest of Rs. 4,36,490/- u/s 40A (2) (b) of the Act. 40. This issue has been already allowed by us in ITA No. 2910/M/2011. Therefore, respectfully following the same we allow the appeal o…

M/S Shreekunj Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 378/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.378/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Shreekunj Securities Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Aayakar Bhawan, 4Th Floor Pvt. Ltd. 6, Turf Road, Kolkata-700025 P-7, Chowring Square, Kolkata-700069

For Appellant: Shri J.N. Gupta,FCAFor Respondent: Anil Kumar Pande, Addl. CIT.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.378/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/s Shreekunj Securities Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Aayakar Bhawan, 4th Floor Pvt. Ltd. 6, Turf Road, Kolkata-700025 P-7, Chowring Square, Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAECS4082M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Anil Kumar Pande, Addl. CIT.DR "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri J.N. Gupta,FCA सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 18/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pr…

DCIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Mimoza Enterprises Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3809/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Vs. Mimoza Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, Circle-2, Dehradun 35/2/9, Kishan Garg, Vasant Kunk, New Delhi Pan:Aafcm7353Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 28Section 32Section 36Section 36(2)

…aw, w.e.f. assessment year 1989 – 90 and the assessee merely needs to write off that is bad in his books to claim the same is an outgoing. He further held that the case of the assessee is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of TRF Ltd 323 ITR 397 (S. C). Revenue, Aggrieved with the order of the first appellate authority is preferred an appeal before us. 4. The first and second ground of appeal are against the disallowance of Rs. 4 368229/– as bed debts written off and Rs. 5 92629/– as other sums written the off. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. assessing officer. 5. Despite notice,…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mark Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed with above direction

ITA 3457/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Mark Buildtech Pvt Ltd, Circle-6(1), Flat No. 714, 89, Kemjunt New Delhi Chambers, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aaecm7261Qw (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 2Section 36

…he business transaction. The comparative sale figure given by the AO is related to a different locality which may have large price variation. 5.3.2 The appellant claimed the amount under the bad debt. As per the decision in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC), it is held that, the assessee having written off certain debt, it is entitled to deduction thereof as bad debt.. There is no further requirement to prove that the debt was a trade debt or that it is irrecoverable. There is no dispute that the amount has been written off as bad debt by the appellant. Following the decision of the Apex Court,…

M.K. Creations, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 14(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3885/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Years: 2010-11 M/S M.K. Creations, Income Tax Officer C/O- Shankarlal Jain & Ward-14(1)(3), बनाम/ Associates, Earnest House, Vs. 12, Engineer Building, Nariman Point, 265, Princess Street, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400002 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pa No.:-Aaafm2004J "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Shankarlal Jain Shri Suman Kumar-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 06/04/2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 07/04/2017 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 50Section 72

…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. 2.3. Even otherwise, in view of the amendment in the taxation laws with effect from 01st April, 1989, the requirement of demonstrating that the debts has become bad has been dispensed with and only requirement remains that it should be “written off” in books of accounts of the assessee, which has bee…

Atcom Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1017/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Atcom Technologies Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 6-A, Lalwani Indl Estae 14 G.D. Circle 6(1) Vs. Ambedkar Mumbai Mumbai-400 031 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aabca2058C Assessee By .. S/Shri K Gopal & Jitendra Singh, Ar Revenue By .. Shri Rahid Raman, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing .. 23-03-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 07-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35DSection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…d the assessment order and the order of CIT-6, Mumbai, it is an admitted fact that the assessee has not produced any evidence to prove its claim that the amount is shown as income in the earlier years. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. TRF Limited 323 ITR 397 has held that only debts which have been shown in accounts as income can be written off as bad debts. The same view i.e. debt must be shown in accounts as income of assessee has been upheld in the case of Lal Woollen and Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. 333 ITR .254. Mere statement by appellant that the details are lost in fire is not enough to substantiate…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Chemical Construction International Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3958/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Circle-3(1), New Delhi Chemical Construction International Pvt. Ltd., 205, Kushal Bazar, 32-33, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan : Aaacc0292M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. A.K. Chadha, Ca Date Of Hearing 28.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 27.03.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 07/06/2011 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Iv (In Short “Cit-A”) For Assessment Year 2007-08, Raising Following Grounds: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting Addition Of Rs.5614565/- On Account Of Contract Receipts, Ignoring The Fact That During The Assessment Proceedings The Assessee Company Failed To Justify Its Abnormally Low G. P. Rate Of 18.16% In Current Year From 28.9% Last Year. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting Addition Of Rs.14591310/- On Account Of Payment Of Lurgi Life Science(Lls) Germany For Drawing Design Charges, Ignoring The Fact That Benefit Of Enduring Nature Was Drawn By The Assessee.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nture Capital Funds Ltd. (2008) 202 Taxation 329 (Del.) and CIT Vs. Nilofer I. Singh (2009) 3009 ITR 233 (Del.) etc. 27. More recently, the Hon’ble Apex Court has also considered the issue. The Supreme Court has decided the issue in T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC). It has been held 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.” 28. Going by the decision of the Delhi High Court and the…

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. M/S. Expo Freight Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2729/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2729/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income V. M/S. Expo Freight Pvt. Ltd., Tax, No.26, Josier Street, Corporate Range – 2(1), Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34 Chennai - 34 Pan: Aaace2126J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A.S. Sriraman, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.03.2017

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Sriraman, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 194HSection 250(6)

…Ltd. decided by the Delhi Tribunal in ITA No.5435/Del/2011 dated 16.09.2011 iii. CIT v Shreyans Industries Ltd. decided by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court dated 08.11.2006 reported in 303 ITR 393 iv. TRF Limited by the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 323 ITR 297 While doing so, the Ld. CIT(A) observed as under :- “6.4 The AO in his order has placed reliance on the decision of Ld. Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ricoh India Ltd. (supra). On careful reading of the order, I find that the facts emerging in the case before the ld. Mumbai Tribunal are distinct from the appellant’s case. In the matter befo…

Mc Nally Sayaji Engineering Limited, North 24 Parganas vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 927/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, CAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…had been duly written off in the books of the assessee as irrecoverable and claimed as bad debts by the assessee u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of T.R.F. Ltd vs CIT reported in 230 CTR 14 (SC). The ld AO on scrutiny of the details of bad debts found that the amount of bad debts of Rs. 31,48,061/- was written off under the following heads :- 1) Eriez MBI India Ltd – Rs. 7,99,850/- related to the year 2007-08 towards sales commission 2) Differential Tax due to non submission of statutory forms – Rs. 51,007/- 3) Advances written off –…

DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1575/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Smt. Shreya Loyalka, CAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

DCIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai vs. International Hometex Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3547/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Saurabh Kumar Rai -DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 253Section 254(1)

…ts were the normal business loss and have been shown in the account for Assessment Year 2007-08. The learned CIT(Appeals) after considering the accounts and submission and relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of M/s TRF Ltd reported vide 323 ITR 397 granted relief to the assessee. Considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd (supra) we do not find any force in the ground of appeal raised by the revenue. Thus, the ground No.2 raised by the revenue is dismissed. The ground No.3&4 are general and needs no adjudication. 7. In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed.…

ACIT 14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Monitron Security P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 657/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singhacit-14(2)(2), फनाभ/ M/S. Monitron Security Pvt Mumbai. Ltd., Vs. 1St Floor, Shahnawaz Bldg, Kale Marg, Kurla Mumbai-70. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacm4446P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Mrs. Beena Santosh, Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : None

For Appellant: Mrs. Beena Santosh, DRFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…thority, after considering the submissions of the assessee, CIT (A) granted relief to the assessee as per the discussion given in para 3.2 of his order wherein the CIT (A) relied on the judgment of the of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited (323 ITR 397) (SC). CIT (A) also followed the decision of his predecessor on identical issue for the AY 2009-2010. Aggrieved with the said decision of the CIT (A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the above mentioned ground. 4. During the proceedings before the Tribunal, none appeared on behalf of the assessee to represent its case. Consid…

ITO, WD-8(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Rightex Commerce Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 510/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…sessee. The assessing officer has not disputed the fact that the bad debt was duly written off by the assessee in the Books of Accounts. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has set at rest the interpretation of Section 36(1)(vii) in the case of TRF Ltd. vis. CIT Ranchi 323 ITR 397 wherein it has been held that after amendment of Section 36(1)(vii) w.e.f. 01.04.89 the claim of bad debt is to be allowed once it is written off in the Books of Accounts. After the amendment it is not required for the assessee to prove that the debt has become irrecoverable. The Assessing Officer has relied on the judgment all of which pertains…

Income Tax Officer-Ward-12(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Attire Arts Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Nishant Overseas Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2618/KOL/2013[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2006-2007

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,‘A’BENCH, KOLKATA Before: Shri M.Balaganesh, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 2618/Kol/2013 A.Y: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer Ward 12(3), Kolkata …Appellant Vs. M/s. Attire Arts P.Ltd (Formerly Nishant Overseas Pvt. Ltd) PAN: AABCN 2989H …Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, ld.DR for the revenue Shri Bishnu Kanti Agarwal, FCA, ld.AR for the assessee Date of hearing : 05-12-2016 Date of pronouncement : 03-02-2017 O R D E R Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM :- This appeal by the Revenue is directed agai…

Vaigarai Public Charitable and Educational Trust, Dindigul vs. ITO, Dindigul

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

ITA 397/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 2(15)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज",लेखा सद"य "यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 397/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2010-2011. Vaigarai Public Charitable Vs. The Income Tax Officer, and Educational Trust, Ward I(1) Beschi College, Dindigul. Karur Road, Dindigul 624 001. [PAN AAATV1676P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate : Shri. Supriyo Pal, IRS, JCIT. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of…

Smita Conductors Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed in favour of assessee

ITA 158/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.158/Mum/2013,"नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (AR)For Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234CSection 253Section 254(1)

…brought before him. The ld CIT (A) wrongly concluded that the assessee has not proved that the debtors written off were offered as revenue income in any of the previous year. The ld CIT (A) not appreciated the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in TRF Ltd Vs CIT 323 ITR 397(SC). The ld AR of the assessee further relied upon the CBDT Circular N0. 12/2016. On the other hand the landed AR for revenue supported the order of authorities below. The ld. DR further argued that assessee has not given any satisfactory explanation before the lower authorities. 9. We have considered the rival contention of the parties and gone…

M/S Cummins Technologies India Private Limited, Dewas vs. The ACIT Circle 1(1), Ujjain

In the result, ITA No. 258/Ind/2015 is allowed and ITA

ITA 232/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. Nos.258/Ind/2015 : A.Y.2007-08 आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. Nos.232/Ind/2016 : A.Y.2010-11 M/S Cummins Technologies India Pvt.Ltd Dewas Pan – Aabct – 2018B :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs Acit 1(1) :: ""यथ" /Respondent Ujjain Shri Girish Agrawal "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By Shri K.G. Goyal राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By 10.1.2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख Date Of Hearing 19.1.2017 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143

…ITA Nos. 258 & 232/Ind/2016 Cummins Technoligies आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE "ी डी.ट".गरा"सया, "या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. Nos.258/Ind/2015 : A.Y.2007-08 आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. Nos.232/Ind/2016 : A.Y.2010-11 M/s Cummins Technologies India Pvt.Ltd Dewas PAN – AABCT – 2018B :: अपीलाथ" /Appellant Vs ACIT 1(1) :: ""यथ" /Respondent Ujjain Shri Girish Agrawal "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by Shri K.G. Goyal राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue by 10.1.2017 स…

Merisant India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO - 9 (2) (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2951/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu: (A.Y : 2011-12) M/S. Merisant India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito-9(2)(3), Mumbai C/O. Hasmukh Shah & Co., (Respondent) 409-410, Dalamal Chambers, New Marine Line, Mumbai 400 020 (Appellant) Pan : Aaccm3132E

For Appellant: Sanjay R. ParikhFor Respondent: Beena Santosh

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 40

…debtors on the debit side of the Balance-sheet and, therefore, such action is to be understood as actual write-off of bad debts. In support of said proposition, reliance was placed on the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited Vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) and Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 (SC). 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR reiterated the stand of the lower authorities that the claim was based on a mere Provision for doubtful debts and was not an actual write-off of bad debts, which was a requirement of Sec. 36(1)(vii) of the Act. 6. I have carefully considered the rival submissions.…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5276/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri B. Pruseth

Section 10Section 14A

…es–off the bad debt as irrecoverable in its accounts it will satisfy the condition of the said provisions and the assessee is no more required to establish that the debt has actually become irrecoverable. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 230 ITR 14 (SC), has expressed this view. Further, in case of Vijaya Bank Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 323 ITR 166 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court held that mere debit to the Profit & Loss account is not sufficient to claim write–off as the assessee has to simultaneously reduce the amount from loans and advances or debtors on assets side of the Balance Sheet to claim r…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ganga Contracts & Projects Ltd., Noida

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

ITA 2783/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

…he Assessee is unable to recover the amount from his debtors, such non-recoverable receipts could appropriately be legally written off as bad debt by Assessee. This aspect has been examined by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of T.R.F. Ltd. vs CIT - [2010] 323 ITR 397 (SC) wherein it is held that after the amendment of Section 36(1 )(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1st April, 1989, in order to obtain a deduction in relation to bad debts, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt has in fact, become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverab…