Vijaya Bank v. CIT

323 ITR 166Supreme Court of India2010#188 most cited

What is Vijaya Bank v. CIT authority for?

A provision for bad and doubtful debts debited to the profit and loss account and reduced from advances on the balance sheet constitutes a write-off for deduction purposes. This is true even if individual debtor accounts are not closed.

392

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vijaya Bank v. CIT · section 36(1)(vii) · write off bad debts · provision for doubtful debts · deduction for bad debts · profit and loss account · balance sheet · advances · loans

Also reported as

190 Taxmann 257231 CTR 209

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(vii)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 115JBSection 37(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 10(34)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)(v)section 41(4)section 36(1)(viia)section 36(1)(vii)section 36(2)section 36(1)(viii)section 115jb(2)additional depreciationsection 10(34)book profitssection 41section 115j

Judgments citing Vijaya Bank v. CIT

M/S. City Union Bank, Kumbakonam vs. DCIT, Circle - 2 (1), Trichy

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 672/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/s. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income- Administrative Office v. tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [PAN: AAACC-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 672/Chny/2020 िन…

DCIT Circle-2(1), Trichy vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 636/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/s. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income- Administrative Office v. tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [PAN: AAACC-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 672/Chny/2020 िन…

ACIT Circle 1, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Ltd., Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1419/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/s. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income- Administrative Office v. tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [PAN: AAACC-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 672/Chny/2020 िन…

ACIT Circle 1, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Ltd., Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1418/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/s. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income- Administrative Office v. tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [PAN: AAACC-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 672/Chny/2020 िन…

City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam vs. ACIT Circle 1, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1121/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/s. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income- Administrative Office v. tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [PAN: AAACC-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 672/Chny/2020 िन…

City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam vs. ACIT Circle 1, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1120/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income- Administrative Office V. Tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 672/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Administrative Office V. Income-Tax, “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Trichy. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1418 & 1419/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [Pan: Aaacc-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 636/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. City Union Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, V. Administrative Office “Narayana” Circle -2(1), 24-B, Gandhi Nagar

For Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1120 & 1121/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 M/s. City Union Bank Ltd., Asst. Commissioner of Income- Administrative Office v. tax, “Narayana” Circle -1, 24-B, Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam- 612 001. [PAN: AAACC-1287-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 672/Chny/2020 िन…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Asian Paints Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2959/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt a/wFor Respondent: Shri Vachashpati Tripathi
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 37(1)

…d that until the assessment year 2009-10, the assessee was not claiming deduction in respect of provision for doubtful debts debited to the Profit and Loss account and only subsequent to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank v/s CIT, (2010) 323 ITR 166 (SC), the assessee started claiming deduction in respect of provision for doubtful debts and similarly any reversal is also offered for taxation. The AO, vide assessment order, did not agree with the submissions of the assessee and held that the reliance placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank (supra) is…

Asian Paints Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Ltu, Mumbai

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

ITA 1673/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhatt a/wFor Respondent: Shri Vachashpati Tripathi
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 37(1)

…d that until the assessment year 2009-10, the assessee was not claiming deduction in respect of provision for doubtful debts debited to the Profit and Loss account and only subsequent to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank v/s CIT, (2010) 323 ITR 166 (SC), the assessee started claiming deduction in respect of provision for doubtful debts and similarly any reversal is also offered for taxation. The AO, vide assessment order, did not agree with the submissions of the assessee and held that the reliance placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank (supra) is…

E-Oriental Bank of Commerce( Now Amalgamated With Punjab National Bank- Pnb), New Delhi vs. ACIT Special Range-07, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 849/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18 E-Oriental Bank Of Commerce Vs. Acit, (Now Amalgamated With Special Range-07 Punjab National Bank-Pnb) New Delhi. Punjab National Bank, Finance Division Plot No. 4, Sector Dwarka, New Delhi- 110 075 Pan Aaaco0191M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.V.S.R. Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(vila)

…as merely relied on the fact that the provisions has been reduced from loans and advances assets of the balance sheet. 5.3 It appears that the AO has not been able to properly grasp the import of Supreme Court decision in the case of Vijaya Bank v. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 166 (SC). In that decision, the hon'ble Supreme Court had laid down twin requirements for being eligible to claim the deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) viz (i) debiting the P&L a/c and creating a provision for bad and doubtful debt, and (ii) correspondingly/simultaneously obliterating the said provision from its accounts by reducing the corresponding amount f…

Lupin Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1921/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

…ance Sheet would amount to actual write off of bad debts and accordingly, it would not be hit by clause (i) of Explanation 1 to sec.115JB of the Act. Both the High Courts have followed the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank (323 ITR 166)(SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court was considering the provisions of sec.36(1)(vii) r.w.s 36(2) of the Act in the context of a banking company. Under the provisions of sec.36(1)(vii) of the Act, an assessee is eligible to claim deduction of “amount of any bad debt or part thereof which is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee”. E…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, C-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Algonomy Software Private Limited (Formerly Known As Manthan Software Services Pvt Ltd), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed and the cross objections being C

ITA 946/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 943 to 946/Bang/2023 Assessment Years : 2012-13 to 2015-16 M/s. Algonomy Software Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as The Deputy Manthan Software Commissioner of Services Pvt. Ltd.), Income Tax, No. 40/4, First Floor, Circle – 1(1)(1), Lavelle Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore. Karnataka – 560 001 PAN: AADCM7750M APPELLANT RESPONDENT & C.O. Nos. 14 to 17/Bang/2023 (in ITA Nos. 943 to 946/Bang/2023) (By Assessee) : Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Assessee by Advocate Revenue…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, C-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Algonomy Software Private Limited (Formerly Known As Manthan Software Services Pvt Ltd), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed and the cross objections being C

ITA 945/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 943 to 946/Bang/2023 Assessment Years : 2012-13 to 2015-16 M/s. Algonomy Software Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as The Deputy Manthan Software Commissioner of Services Pvt. Ltd.), Income Tax, No. 40/4, First Floor, Circle – 1(1)(1), Lavelle Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore. Karnataka – 560 001 PAN: AADCM7750M APPELLANT RESPONDENT & C.O. Nos. 14 to 17/Bang/2023 (in ITA Nos. 943 to 946/Bang/2023) (By Assessee) : Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Assessee by Advocate Revenue…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, C-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Algonomy Software Private Limited (Formerly Known As Manthan Software Services Pvt Ltd), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed and the cross objections being C

ITA 944/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 943 to 946/Bang/2023 Assessment Years : 2012-13 to 2015-16 M/s. Algonomy Software Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as The Deputy Manthan Software Commissioner of Services Pvt. Ltd.), Income Tax, No. 40/4, First Floor, Circle – 1(1)(1), Lavelle Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore. Karnataka – 560 001 PAN: AADCM7750M APPELLANT RESPONDENT & C.O. Nos. 14 to 17/Bang/2023 (in ITA Nos. 943 to 946/Bang/2023) (By Assessee) : Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Assessee by Advocate Revenue…

Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited, Thrissur vs. DCIT Circle 1(1) & Tps, Thrissur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 933/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Daskerala State Financial Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) & Tps Enterprises Ltd. Thrissur Bhadratha, Museum Road Vs. Chembukkavu - 680020 Thrissur [Pan:Aabct3817A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Harikrishnanunny, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…he Act for the relevant year is in accordance with law, i.e., as explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court per it’s decision in Southern Technologies Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC), and as further reiterated and explained by it in Vijaya Bank v. CIT [2010] 323 ITR 166 (SC). Interestingly, both the assessee and the Revenue claiming satisfaction of the conditions for a write off (of a bad debt as irrecoverable) in accounts, i.e., as mandated by section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, and the law laid down per the cited decisions, i.e., where effected not directly by a debit to the operating statement (for the relevant ye…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 663/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…A Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 19 of 31 7.3 The assessee further submitted that the issue of actual write-off of debts in the loan account of the debtors, is covered in favour of the appellant Bank in the following cases,- (i) Vijaya Bank Vs CIT (2010) (323 ITR 166) (SC) (ii) UCO Bank Vs CIT (240) (ITR 355) (SC) (iii) Southern Technologies Vs CIT (352 ITR 577) (SC) (iv) Canara Bank Vs DCIT (2022 (1) TMI 124) (Trib.- Bangalore) (i.e Appellants own case) 7.4 The assessee further argued that the issue that the bad debt written off should be first adjusted against the credit balance in the Provisions account an…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…A Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 19 of 31 7.3 The assessee further submitted that the issue of actual write-off of debts in the loan account of the debtors, is covered in favour of the appellant Bank in the following cases,- (i) Vijaya Bank Vs CIT (2010) (323 ITR 166) (SC) (ii) UCO Bank Vs CIT (240) (ITR 355) (SC) (iii) Southern Technologies Vs CIT (352 ITR 577) (SC) (iv) Canara Bank Vs DCIT (2022 (1) TMI 124) (Trib.- Bangalore) (i.e Appellants own case) 7.4 The assessee further argued that the issue that the bad debt written off should be first adjusted against the credit balance in the Provisions account an…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…A Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 19 of 31 7.3 The assessee further submitted that the issue of actual write-off of debts in the loan account of the debtors, is covered in favour of the appellant Bank in the following cases,- (i) Vijaya Bank Vs CIT (2010) (323 ITR 166) (SC) (ii) UCO Bank Vs CIT (240) (ITR 355) (SC) (iii) Southern Technologies Vs CIT (352 ITR 577) (SC) (iv) Canara Bank Vs DCIT (2022 (1) TMI 124) (Trib.- Bangalore) (i.e Appellants own case) 7.4 The assessee further argued that the issue that the bad debt written off should be first adjusted against the credit balance in the Provisions account an…

DCIT Cir - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 573/MUM/2007[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ical manner had added provision for doubtful debts. The CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The Revenue carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal following the decision rendered in the case of Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 (SC) upheld the findings of CIT(A) and dismissed the ground raised by the Revenue. In the impugned assessment year there is no change in the facts. Consequently, the ground No.6 raised in the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed. 103. Respectfully following the above decision and following the principle of consistency, the view taken by the Tribuna…

M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3055/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ical manner had added provision for doubtful debts. The CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The Revenue carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal following the decision rendered in the case of Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 (SC) upheld the findings of CIT(A) and dismissed the ground raised by the Revenue. In the impugned assessment year there is no change in the facts. Consequently, the ground No.6 raised in the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed. 103. Respectfully following the above decision and following the principle of consistency, the view taken by the Tribuna…

The DCIT 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2655/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ical manner had added provision for doubtful debts. The CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The Revenue carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal following the decision rendered in the case of Vijaya Bank vs. CIT, 323 ITR 166 (SC) upheld the findings of CIT(A) and dismissed the ground raised by the Revenue. In the impugned assessment year there is no change in the facts. Consequently, the ground No.6 raised in the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed. 103. Respectfully following the above decision and following the principle of consistency, the view taken by the Tribuna…