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 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

TRF Ltd. v. CIT · section 36(1)(vii) · bad debts · deduction · irrecoverable · written off · assessee's accounts · income tax act

Also reported as

190 Taxmann 391230 CTR 14190 Taxmann.com 391

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 147Section 14ASection 36(2)Section 148Section 40(a)(ia)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)section 36(1)(vii)business expediencysection 36(1)section 36commercial expediencyrevenue expendituredisallowance under section 14acapital expendituresection 28section 115jsection 14a

Judgments citing TRF Ltd. v. CIT

M/S.Hdb Financial Services Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 177/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80J

…settled position of law that once the bad debts have been duly written off in the books of accounts, amount claimed as bad debt is allowable. In this regards reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. CIT - (2010) 323 ITR 397 and various case laws of the Gujarat High Court. 4. The Ld PCIT considered the above reply of the assessee and having not satisfied with the same, has set aside the assessment order passed by the Ld. A.O. by observing as follows: (i) Collect the revised audit report in form 3CD as the auditor of the company has not certified the deduction u/s 80…

DCIT, Circle- 18(1), New Delhi vs. Nidhi Builders (International) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3950/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3950/Del/2017, A.Y.2012-13) DCIT, M/s. Nidhi Builders Circle-18(1), (International) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi Vs. B-2/1-B, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi-110029 PAN : AABCN4091J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Priyansh Jain, CA Respondent by Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 10/01/2024 Date of Pronouncement 17/01/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM: This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Learned Commissioner o…

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 84/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.84/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(3)Section 43B

…al action was taken for recovery of debts which did not yield any results. Therefore, the said amount was written-off. Clearly this amount is allowable as deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) in terms of ratio of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. (323 ITR 397). We order so. 5.4 So far as the expenditure of Rs.25.43 Lacs is concerned, the nature of expenditure is such that it could be termed as revenue expenditure. The assessee has spent amount to propagate new varieties of produce and to facilitate visit of farmers and distribution of samples. Such expenditure is incurred in the ordinary course of bus…

M/S Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. The ITO, Corportion Ward-3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 388/CHNY/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.388/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &
Section 143(3)

…redit balance to the tune of Rs.150 lakhs appearing against the said customer adjusted and net balance written off during the financial year 2009-10. 2.2 The appellant relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited Vs. CIT, Reported in 323 ITR 397 (SC). 3. The CIT(A) / NFAC erred in confirming the disallowance of proportionate interest expenses on advanced to sister concerns amounting to Rs.85,71,947/-. 3.1 The CIT(A) / NFAC ought to have appreciated that Hon'ble ITAT in appellant own case for the AY 2000-01 by order dated 20.10.2004 allowed the claim in respect of advances given to the su…

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 210/CHNY/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.210/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2007-08) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)

…to pharma and Agri business divisions. The amounts due from various parties towards sale of goods during the course of income could not be recovered and the same has been written-off in the books of accounts. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. (323 ITR 397) held that to make aforesaid claim, it was sufficient that the amount was written-off in the books of accounts. Since the assessee has written-off these amounts, applying the ratio of this decision, this claim would be allowable to the assessee. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee stand allowed accordingly. 5. Disallowance of 50% exp…

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 209/CHNY/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.208/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.209/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &
Section 143(3)

…appreciated that the amounts written off represents debts that became irrecoverable from the trade debtors and written off as bad debts in the books of accounts. The assessee relies on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 323 ITR 397(SC). 3.2 Without prejudice to the above the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have allowed the same as business loss. As is evident, the additions / disallowance which forms the subject matter of this appeal are two-folds i.e., (i) Disallowance of proportionate interest expenditure; (ii) Disallowance of Bad debts written-off. 5. The…

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 208/CHNY/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.208/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.209/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &
Section 143(3)

…appreciated that the amounts written off represents debts that became irrecoverable from the trade debtors and written off as bad debts in the books of accounts. The assessee relies on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 323 ITR 397(SC). 3.2 Without prejudice to the above the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have allowed the same as business loss. As is evident, the additions / disallowance which forms the subject matter of this appeal are two-folds i.e., (i) Disallowance of proportionate interest expenditure; (ii) Disallowance of Bad debts written-off. 5. The…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3), Mumbai vs. Sanjiv Mahendra Parikh, Mumbai

ITA 839/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: 31.03.2014.”

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan
Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 73

…rused the assessment order, grounds of appeal and submission of the Appellant carefully. I find that the during the course of assessment proceedings, the appellant relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of TRF Ltd vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) and relying on CBDT circular 12/2016 dated 30/07/2016 had submitted before the AO that the bad debts arised out of transaction with NSEL are eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(vii). However the AO had denied the claim of the Appellant. The observation of the AO in para 5.4 of the assessment order is reproduced as under:- 5.4. While considering…

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG (1), Mumbai

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4248/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 10(15)Section 115JSection 234BSection 41(4)Section 88ESection 90

…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…

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

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4158/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 10(15)Section 115JSection 234BSection 41(4)Section 88ESection 90

…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…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Comfort Net Traders (I) (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 457/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

…(A) was of the opinion that it is for the assessee to decide whether the debt has become bad or not and whether the same had been accounted for in its books of account. Drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited 323 ITR 397 and Vijaya Bank 323 ITR 166, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition. 10. The ld. DR placed strong reliance on the findings of the Assessing Officer and read the relevant operative part. 11. Per contra, the ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities. 12. We have carefully considered the factual matr…

M/S. Comfort Net Traders (I) (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6791/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

…(A) was of the opinion that it is for the assessee to decide whether the debt has become bad or not and whether the same had been accounted for in its books of account. Drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited 323 ITR 397 and Vijaya Bank 323 ITR 166, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition. 10. The ld. DR placed strong reliance on the findings of the Assessing Officer and read the relevant operative part. 11. Per contra, the ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities. 12. We have carefully considered the factual matr…

Kaizen Cold Formed Steel Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Circle-4(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 172/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.172/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S.Kaizen Cold Formed Steel Pvt.Ltd, Acit बनाम 14A, Ennore High Road, Corporate Circle-4(2), / Vs. Thiruvottiyur, Chennai-600 019. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadck-7625-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. V.Madhunika (Advocate)-Ld.Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R.Raghupathy (Jcit)- Ld.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05-10-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. V.Madhunika (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R.Raghupathy (JCIT)- Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36

…1st Respondent does not have the authority or the power to prescribe method by which a bad debt is written off. It is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC) and TRF Ltd v. CIT [2010] 323 ITR 397 (SC) have categorically held that for the purpose of writing off a bad debt, it would suffice if the assessee had debited the same to Profit and Loss Account, credited the same to the Bad Reserve Debts Account and maintain a Sundry Debtors list. Therefore, in this context, it is submitted that the Appellant has satisfied the above-mentioned requi…

M/S Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Jan Path, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

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

ITA 261/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT)
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 147

…ingHon’ble Supreme Court and Rajasthan High Court haveheld that the only condition for allowing the bad debt is that the same is written off in the books of the assessee. Reliance in this connection is placed on the following cases:- TRF Limited Vs. CIT(2010) 323 ITR 397 (SC) The relevant para of the said decision reads as under:- “4. This position in law is well-settled. After 1st April, 1989, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that thedebt, in fact, has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts ofthe assessee. However, in the present case,…

Kmi Business Technologies Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1399/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 115JSection 36(1)(vii)

…1 ITA 1399/Mum/2023 KMI Business Technologies Pvt Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”,MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.1399/Mum/2023 (Assessment year : 2016-17) KMI Business Technologies Private vs DCIT-CC-8(2), Mumbai Limited, 1008, Dalamal House Room No.658, Aayakar Bhavan Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 PAN : AAACO7146E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Present for the Assessee Shri Priyank Ghia, CA Present for the Department Shri Prakash Kishinchandani, Sr.AR Date of hearing 17/08/2023 Date of pronouncemen…

DCIT, Circle-27(1), New Delhi vs. Uk India Business Council India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

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

ITA 3249/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: filing of return replying on the judgment of jurisdiction High Court given in the case of CIT vs. AIMIL. Ltd. without appreciating the judgment given by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of M/s. Unifac Management Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cooperation Circle- 3(2), WP No. 5264 of 2018 (Madras), CIT-2, vs. Gujrat State Road Transport Cooperation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj) and CTT vs. Merchem Ltd. (2015) 280 CTR 381 (Kerala) and CBDT's Circular No. 22/2

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

…view of the factual matrix of this grounds and with the support of judicial precedents in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Morgan Securities and Credits Pvt. Ltd. [(2007) 292 ITR 339 (Delhi) and T.R.F. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income- tax {(2010) 323 ITR 397(S.C)., we find no error or infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the above said disallowance made by the A.O. Accordingly, the Ground No. 3 of the Revenue is dismissed. GROUND NO. 4 15. Ground No. 4 is regarding disallowance of Rs. 26,409/- made by the A.O. for delayed payment of provident fund and ESI. The issue involved in Ground…

Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd (in Respect of M.S, Icici Ltd Merged With M.S, Icici Bank Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8435/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner Of Income-Tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Icici Bank Limited, Icici Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. Pan: Aaaci-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 23Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 80M

…t has turned bad, if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the books of account, the same is sufficient to claim it as bad. In support of this contention the ld.Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) TRF Ltd. vs. CIT , 230 CTR 14 (SC) (ii) Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 (SC) She further referred to the order of Tribunal in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2004-05 and 2005-06, wherein the Tribunal had restored the issue back to the file of Assessing Officer in light of decision in the case of 11 ITA NO.8435/MUM/2010(A.Y.2003-04) Vijaya Bank (supra). In the o…

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8420/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner Of Income-Tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Icici Bank Limited, Icici Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. Pan: Aaaci-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 23Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 80M

…t has turned bad, if the debt is written off as irrecoverable in the books of account, the same is sufficient to claim it as bad. In support of this contention the ld.Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) TRF Ltd. vs. CIT , 230 CTR 14 (SC) (ii) Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 (SC) She further referred to the order of Tribunal in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2004-05 and 2005-06, wherein the Tribunal had restored the issue back to the file of Assessing Officer in light of decision in the case of 11 ITA NO.8435/MUM/2010(A.Y.2003-04) Vijaya Bank (supra). In the o…

S.B.& T. Designs Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy. CIT 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 814/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhs.B. &. T. Designs Ltd. Vs. The Dy. Cit 8(1)(2) Room No. 15, 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Yusuf Building, Abdul New Marine Line, Rehman Street, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 003 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaics6223L Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Dr. P. Daniel Respondent By : Suresh D. Gaikwad Date Of Hearing 10.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 23.02.2023 For A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Learned C.I.T(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 6.18,65,166/-, Being The Bad Debts Claimed. 2. The Learned C.I.T(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Confirming The Disallowances Of Bad Debts Of Rs. 6,18,65,166/-, Being The Sundry Drs. Written Off As Well As Sundry Balances Written Off. 3. The Learned C.I.T(A) Erred In Not Following The Principles Of Natural Justice. 4. The Learned C.It(A) Confirmed The Order Of The A.O. Directing The Assessee To Prove The Impossible Acts.

For Appellant: Dr. P. DanielFor Respondent: Suresh D. Gaikwad
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…both in the assessment order and in the appeal order, the assessee submitted that copies of ledger account were attached. In support of its contention the assessee has also referred the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397. However, the ld. CIT(A) has neither called any remand report from the assessing officer nor controvert the submission of the assessee and also not specify any other particular details required to be furnished by the assessee. Therefore, looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances we restore this issue to the file ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating…

Gbt India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, OSD, Delhi

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

ITA 1763/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu S. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, CIT DR
Section 43BSection 92C

…y the Appellant for earlier A Y s. 21. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP/Ld. AO failed to appreciate that it was bound by the decision of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Lid v. CIT [2010J 323 ITR 397 (SC) wherein it was held that an expense deduction in relation to the bad debts written off during the A Y has to be allowed. OTHER GROUNDS 22. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in levying interest under Section 234A and 234B of the Act. 23. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, t…