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

ACIT 14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Nutrine Confectionery Co.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2107/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…1,65,460/-. Thus, there is no concealment or inaccurate particular. With regard to the disallowance of bad-debts, the ld. CIT(A) observed that issue of bad-debts is a debatable issue, and relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397. And with regard to fourth issue regarding Non-reconciliation of ITS details, the ld. CIT(A) observed that it was a mistake of Andhra Bank and interest does not pertains to the assessee and the assessee cannot be penalized for the mistake in Form-26AS of third party and granted the relief on the basis of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case…

Inventia Healthcare P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 9(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 5049/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri R.S. Padvekarm/S. Inventia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., (Earlier Known As M/S. Themis Laboratories P. Ltd.) Unit No.4, Khira Indl. Estate, Acit –13(2), 477, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai -400 020 .....…. Appellant Vs Dcit -9(2), Mumbai .....… Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anil J. SatheFor Respondent: Shri Parasarth Naik
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)

…by stating that there was no failure on the part of the 3 M/s. Inventia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. assessee to disclose any material fact and on merit also the assessee’s case was covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT-323 ITR 397(S.C.) as the assessee has actually written off the bad debts. The A.O. rejected the contention of the assessee and completed the re-assessment, re-determining the total income at ` 63,20,159/- by making the additions towards bad debts and web designing and patent expenses to the extent of ` 43,64,204/- and ` 5,11,863/- respectively. The assessee…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Modi Apollo International Group Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for A

ITA 223/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri L.P. Sahu & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 195Section 35ASection 40

…36(1)(vii) of the Act, by the Finance Act, 1987 to the effect that it would be sufficient compliance with the provisions of that section if the debt was written off in the books of accounts. Reliance is placed on the following decisions:- • TRF Ltd. v. CIT: 323 ITR 397 (SC) • CIT vs Auto Pins India Ltd.: 208 Taxman 5 (Delhi) • CIT v. Autometers Limited: 292 ITR 345 (Del) • CIT vs. Coates of India Limited: 232 ITR 324 (Cal) • CIT vs. Brilliant Tutorials (P) Ltd: 292 ITR 399 (Mad) • Nandlal Vithaldas v. CIT: 180 ITR 609 (Bom) • CIT v. Star Chemicals (Bombay) P. Ltd.: 220 CTR 319 • DIT v. Oman International Bank S…

M/S. Prem Service Station, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1797/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Acit, Circle-32(1), New Delhi M/S. Prem Service Station, Andrew Ganj, New Delhi Pan : Aaafp6998C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 18.11.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 27/12/2012 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)- Xxvi, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-92, For Assessment Year 2008-09 Raising Following Grounds: “1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has In Law & On Facts In Not Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 9,51,280/- Fully As Made By Ld. Ao U/S 36(I)(Iv) On Account Of Bed Debts & The Impugned Addition Has Been Made Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & By Recording Incorrect Facts & Findings. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Ao In Making Adhoc Disallowance Of Rs.32,340/- On Account Of Advertising Expenses.

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. ACIT, Circle-32(1), New Delhi M/s. Prem Service Station, Andrew Ganj, New Delhi PAN : AAAFP6998C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. Respondent by Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.DR Date of hearing 24.08.2016 Date of pronouncement 18.11.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 27/12/2012 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- XXVI, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-92, for assessme…

Rama Vision Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1317/DEL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2002-03 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Rama Vision Ltd., Rama House, 23 Najafgarh Road, Tax, Circle-15(1), New Delhi. Industrial Area, Shivaji Marg, New Delhi. Pan : Aaacr0221R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R.K. Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 18.11.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 14/10/2010 Of Learner Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xviii, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2002-03 Raising Following Grounds: “1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 67,096/- On Account Of Depreciation On Insurance Claim Of Rs. 2,68,386/- Received During The Year Against Company Claim On Repair Of Old & Used D.G Set Under Machinery Breakdown Insurance Policy, Depreciation Disallowed Calculated @25% On Claim Received Rs. 2,68,386/-. The Ld. Cit(A) Completely Ignored The Detailed Written Submission Dated 16.08.2005 Submitted During Appeal Proceedings.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2002-03 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income M/s. Rama Vision Ltd., Rama House, 23 Najafgarh Road, Tax, Circle-15(1), New Delhi. Industrial Area, Shivaji Marg, New Delhi. PAN : AAACR0221R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. R.K. Gupta, Adv. Respondent by Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.DR Date of hearing 24.08.2016 Date of pronouncement 18.11.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 14/10/2010 of learner Commissioner o…

M/S K. Manibhai & Co., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-35, Kolkata

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

ITA 1343/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 36(1)(vii)

…see before the Assessing Officer that all the debts written off by it as bad were very old debts and the same had become irrecoverable. Reliance was also placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited –vs.- CIT [323 ITR 397] to contend that the relevant debts having been written off from the books of account for the year under consideration, it was entitled to claim deduction under section 36(1)(vii). This stand of the assessee was not found acceptable by the Assessing Officer. According to him, there was nothing brought on record by the assessee to establish that t…

DCIT, Tiruppur vs. R.Easwaran, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed whereas

ITA 421/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.168/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012

For Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 36(1)(vii)

…ee it was only required to effect a write off in the books of accounts, and this was duly done by it. It also relied on para 6.6 of CBDT circular No.44 dated 23.01.1990. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT 323 ITR 397. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after going through the submissions of the ld. Authorised Representative held that the law laid down by Apex Court in TRF Ltd (supra) could only be applied in normal circumstances and not where the claim itself was a perverse one. However, according to him, "54,00,000/- relating to Shri. K.L. Palanis…

R.Eswaran (HUF), Tiruppur vs. DCIT, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed whereas

ITA 168/CHNY/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.168/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012

For Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 36(1)(vii)

…ee it was only required to effect a write off in the books of accounts, and this was duly done by it. It also relied on para 6.6 of CBDT circular No.44 dated 23.01.1990. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT 323 ITR 397. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after going through the submissions of the ld. Authorised Representative held that the law laid down by Apex Court in TRF Ltd (supra) could only be applied in normal circumstances and not where the claim itself was a perverse one. However, according to him, "54,00,000/- relating to Shri. K.L. Palanis…

Chatterjee Management Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the AY 2008-09 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 610/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri: A.K. Tibrewal, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A

…Kolkata erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.6,66,667 made by the Assessing Officer, on account of bad debts claimed by the Assessee Company, in complete disregard of the binding judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT [2010] 323 ITR 397 (SC). 5) That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Kolkata erred in upholding the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of the Depreciation of Rs.10,97,669 which was admissible as per the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Income Tax Rules, 1962. 6) That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1…

ITO 3(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Snow Valley Construction Mateiral P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4377/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri S.C. Tiwari and Ms. Rituja PawarFor Respondent: Shri Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…bad debts were available on the file of the assessee, that the AO had not brought any new information to suggest that assessee’s income had escaped assessment, that there was no justification for reopening the assessment. He referred to the case of TRF Ltd. (230 CTR 14) and Kelvinator of India Ltd. (322 ITR 561) and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5.During the course of hearing before us, the Departmental Representative(DR) supported the order of the AO and referred to the case of Rajesh Jhaveri. The Authorised Representative(AR) argued that reasons recorded by the AO are not valid, that bad debts had…

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Times Guarantee Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 5817/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(i)

…ful bad debts does not arise in the current year and accordingly disallowed bad debts claim made by the assessee. 4. Learned CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397. Aggrieved, the Revenue has filed this appeal before us. 5. Learned Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee has not shown that it had declared interest of ` 87.55 lakhs as bad debts income in the past years. Further he submitted that the assessee has claimed principal component of the advances also as deduction, which is not allo…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Galileo India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 88/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, Advocate
Section 14A

…d to prove its efforts of their recovery or that the said debts became irrecoverable, by way of stepping into the shoes of business. This view of ours is fortified by the following decisions relied by the ld. Counsel for the assessee : (i). TRF Ltd. vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) (ii). Minda HUF Ltd. vs. JCIT 285 ITR(AT) 88 (Del. Tri.) (iii). CIT vs. Modi Telecommunication Ltd. 325 ITR 291 (Del.) (iv). Madhav Marbles and Granites vs. ITAT, 362 ITR 647 (Raj.) 21 ITA No.88/Del./2014 20. In view of these decisions, and in the totality of facts and circumstances, we do not find any justification to interfere with the…

Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 13/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Balbir Singh Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234Section 32Section 45

…essee’s claim of Rs. 13,46,23,050/-. 14.2. Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO’s claim. 15. Ld. counsel submitted that the loans have been written off is not disputed by the department. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “The position of law is well settled. After April 9, 1989 it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee” 16. Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the ingredients l…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ge Money Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5854/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Balbir Singh Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234Section 32Section 45

…essee’s claim of Rs. 13,46,23,050/-. 14.2. Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO’s claim. 15. Ld. counsel submitted that the loans have been written off is not disputed by the department. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “The position of law is well settled. After April 9, 1989 it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee” 16. Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the ingredients l…

Ge Money Financial Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4235/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Balbir Singh Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234Section 32Section 45

…essee’s claim of Rs. 13,46,23,050/-. 14.2. Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO’s claim. 15. Ld. counsel submitted that the loans have been written off is not disputed by the department. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “The position of law is well settled. After April 9, 1989 it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee” 16. Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the ingredients l…

Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4206/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Balbir Singh Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234Section 32Section 45

…essee’s claim of Rs. 13,46,23,050/-. 14.2. Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO’s claim. 15. Ld. counsel submitted that the loans have been written off is not disputed by the department. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “The position of law is well settled. After April 9, 1989 it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee” 16. Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the ingredients l…

Ge Countrywide Consumer Financial Services Ltd vs. DCIT, Circle-12(1)

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1357/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Balbir Singh Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 234Section 32Section 45

…essee’s claim of Rs. 13,46,23,050/-. 14.2. Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO’s claim. 15. Ld. counsel submitted that the loans have been written off is not disputed by the department. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “The position of law is well settled. After April 9, 1989 it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee” 16. Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the ingredients l…

Mafatlal Finance Company Ltd ( Now Known As Hybrid Financial Services Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(2), Mumbai

In the result assesses appeal for A

ITA 5531/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Jason P.Boaz (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. Neil Philip
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…o 2003-04 & ITA 5531/MUM/2013 Assessment Year: 2006-07 & ITA 7177/Mum/2010 Assessment Year: 2007-08 establish that the debt had become bad. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, after 01/04/1989, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debts has become irrecoverable. Deduction has to be allowed u/s 37(1)(vii) of the Act if the bad debts is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has no jurisdiction to confirm the disallowance merely on the ground that th…

Metro Motors Auto Division, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 16(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 8000/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Chandravijay, A.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA. No. 8000/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year:2005-06) Metro Motors Auto Division Maker Bhawan No.2, 2nd Floor, 18, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 020 Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Range – 16(3)(4), Matru Mandir, Mumbai-400 007 Respondent PAN: AABFM7783R अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant : Shri Mayur Kisnadwala, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent : Shri Chandravijay, A.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 18.08.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement :…

Mafatlal Fianance Co. Ltd ( Now Known As Hybrid Financial Sevice Ltd ), Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result assesses appeal for A

ITA 7177/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Jason P.Boaz (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. Neil Philip
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…o 2003-04 & ITA 5531/MUM/2013 Assessment Year: 2006-07 & ITA 7177/Mum/2010 Assessment Year: 2007-08 establish that the debt had become bad. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT 323 ITR 397, after 01/04/1989, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debts has become irrecoverable. Deduction has to be allowed u/s 37(1)(vii) of the Act if the bad debts is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has no jurisdiction to confirm the disallowance merely on the ground that th…