← All Phrases

“Section 36(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(2)440 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 36(2) is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 36(2)

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.
321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court
1,629
citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court
1,392
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.
319 ITR 306 · 2009 · Supreme Court
1,344
citing judgments

A proviso inserted into a section to remedy unintended consequences, make the section workable, or supply an obvious omission must be read retrospectively in operation to give effect to the section as a whole.

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court
1,158
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

TRF Ltd. v. CIT
323 ITR 397 · 2010 · Supreme Court
714
citing judgments

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.

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

(i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd.
378 ITR 443 · 2015 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Belated remittance of employees' contribution to ESI and PF, even if deposited before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1), is not allowed as a deduction. This disallowance falls under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x), as Section 43B applies only to employer's contributions.

Judgments citing Section 36(2)

Siwana Agri Marketing Limited (Now Merged With Vital Connections LLP), Ahmedabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1094/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1094/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Siwana Agri Marketing Ltd. The Acit बनाम/ (Now Merged With Vital Circle-4(1)(1) V/S. Connections Llp) Ahmedabad 401, Ashopalav Apartments Near Suvidha Shopping Centre Paldi Ahmedabad – 380 007 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaccs 9598 J (अपीलाथ&/ Appellant) ('( यथ&/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Prakash D. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(2)

these advances with interest-free funds and did not demonstrate any business purpose. The AO also disallowed Rs.8,002/-, citing non-compliance with Section 36(2) of the Act, as the amount written off was not recognized as income in earlier years. 3. The assessee appealed the AO’s order ... ACIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 5 • The disallowance of Rs.8,002/- on account of sundry balances written off, citing non-compliance with Section 36(2) of the Act. 6.1. The CIT(A) observed that the assessee failed to substantiate its claim that interest-free funds were utilized for the interest

Nuevosol Energy Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 958/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.958/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Nuevosol Energy Private Vs. Assistant Commissioner Limited Of Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-16(1) [Pan : Aadcn7551K] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 27/11/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25/07/2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2018-19 On The Following Grounds : 1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Contrary To The Facts & Also The Law Applicable To The Facts Of The Case. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.2,65,80,027

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 36(1)(vii)

debt written off in books of accounts as irrecoverable is allowable as deduction. The only condition provided for claiming deduction in terms of section 36(2) of the Act and as per the said provision, the only requirement is to write off of bad debts in the books of accounts

Goldiam Jewellery Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-CC 1(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no order as to cost

ITA 3272/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms Padmavathy Svs. Acit – Cc 1(2) Goldiam Jewellery Ltd Mumbai. G-10, Ground Floor, Gems & Jewellery Complex Ii, Seeps Sez, Andheri East, Mumbai – 400096. Pan/Gir No. Aaccg3424F (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

offered interest income to tax as business income Whether doubtful debt in question qualified for deduction under section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2) Held, yes [Para 3] [In favour of assessee] 10. From the above, we noticed that Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court

Nesco Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5182/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Satish R. Mody, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Preetam Kumar Turerao, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(i)

have never been offered to tax either during the previous year or earlier years. Thus, assessee failed to satisfy the conditions provided in section 36(2)(i) and also disqualifies from availing deduction u/s. 36(1)(vii). Details of the amount written off by the assessee for which the addition

DCIT (It)-2(1)(2), Air Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai vs. Dbs Bank Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4722/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 3691/Mum/2023

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala/Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Permpurna, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(2)Section 37(1)Section 44C

written off of Rs.427,46,46,000 ought to be allowed as deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act read with section 36(2) of the Act. 2. The CIT(A) erred in applying the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Southern Technologies ... written off of Rs.3,28,68,000 ought to be allowed as deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act read with section 36(2) of the Act. 7. Without prejudice to ground no. (5) above, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of AO in not allowing

Dbs Bank Ltd (Dbs Bank Ltd., India Branches Now Converted Into Dbs Bank India Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT (Int Txt)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3691/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala/Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Permpurna, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(2)Section 37(1)Section 44C

written off of Rs.427,46,46,000 ought to be allowed as deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act read with section 36(2) of the Act. 2. The CIT(A) erred in applying the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Southern Technologies ... written off of Rs.3,28,68,000 ought to be allowed as deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act read with section 36(2) of the Act. 7. Without prejudice to ground no. (5) above, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of AO in not allowing

JCIT(OSD) Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. Indian Bank, Chennai

ITA 527/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2018-19
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

debt or part thereof which is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee for the previous year: Section 36(2)(v) reads as under: “where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies ... provides that the write offs made by the banks in respect of advances will be allowed as deduction subject to the provisions of Section 36(2)(v).A coordinating reading of 36(2)(v) and 36(1)(vii) will provide that that write offs in respect of advances for which

JCIT(OSD) Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. Indian Bank, Chennai

ITA 526/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2017-18
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

debt or part thereof which is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee for the previous year: Section 36(2)(v) reads as under: “where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies ... provides that the write offs made by the banks in respect of advances will be allowed as deduction subject to the provisions of Section 36(2)(v).A coordinating reading of 36(2)(v) and 36(1)(vii) will provide that that write offs in respect of advances for which

JCIT(OSD) Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. Indian Bank, Chennai

ITA 517/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

debt or part thereof which is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee for the previous year: Section 36(2)(v) reads as under: “where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies ... provides that the write offs made by the banks in respect of advances will be allowed as deduction subject to the provisions of Section 36(2)(v).A coordinating reading of 36(2)(v) and 36(1)(vii) will provide that that write offs in respect of advances for which

JCIT(OSD) Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. Indian Bank, Chennai

ITA 516/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri M.Sanjeev Aditya, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.Nayani Swapna, CIT
Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

debt or part thereof which is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee for the previous year: Section 36(2)(v) reads as under: “where such debt or part of debt relates to advances made by an assessee to which clause (viia) of sub-section (1) applies ... provides that the write offs made by the banks in respect of advances will be allowed as deduction subject to the provisions of Section 36(2)(v).A coordinating reading of 36(2)(v) and 36(1)(vii) will provide that that write offs in respect of advances for which

Gujarat Insecticides Limited, Bharuch vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1) (Previously the ACIT, Circle-2, Bharuch), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 675/AHD/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.675/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-08 Gujarat Insecticides Ltd. The Dy.Cit बनाम/ Plot No.805-806 Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Gidc Estate, Ankleshwar Vadodara-390 007 Bharuch,Ankleshwar – 393 002 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaacg 8436 D अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay R. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

been previously offered to tax as business income in prior years, thus fulfilling the conditions under Section 36(1)(vii) read with Section 36(2). Since the income had already been recognized and subsequently became irrecoverable, it qualified for deduction as a bad debt. • Alternatively, the assessee contended that even

D.C.I.T., Circle 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue in I

ITA 5792/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. P.C. Chhotoray, Spl. Counsel, [D/R]
Section 10Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

business and this is not in dispute. Therefore, the write off in the books of accounts is sufficient for the claim. 32.1. Moreover, Section 36(2) of the Act provides as under:- (2) In making any deduction for a bad debt or part thereof, the following provisions shall apply

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue in I

ITA 5396/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. P.C. Chhotoray, Spl. Counsel, [D/R]
Section 10Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

business and this is not in dispute. Therefore, the write off in the books of accounts is sufficient for the claim. 32.1. Moreover, Section 36(2) of the Act provides as under:- (2) In making any deduction for a bad debt or part thereof, the following provisions shall apply

Iss Facility Services India Pvt Ltd (Merged Entity Erstwhile Iss Integrated Services Pvt Ltd), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 10(2), Mumbai

ITA 2404/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Iss Facility Services India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Circle 10(2), Mumbai (Merged Entity Erstwhile Iss Integrated Services Pvt. Ltd.) Ground Floor, East Wing, Leela Vs Business Park, Near Airport Road Metro Station, Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan: Aabci 3815 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed & Shri Ayush ChhajedFor Respondent: Shri Raj Singh Meel, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(2)

opening debtors, for which income was already offered were submitted, and therefore the claim was appropriately made under the provisions of section 36(2). 5 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 17,90,171/- towards advances written off without appreciating that

The Louis Berger Group Inc, Gugaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Incomne Tax, International Taxation, Gurgaon

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

ITA 2630/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshthe Louis Berger Group Inc, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 3, Surinder Jakhir Dcit/Acit, International Bhawan, Sector-32, Gurgaon Taxation, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacl4067F

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vazanta, CIT DR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

That as required by law, bad debt has been written off in its books of accounts as per section 36(1)(vii) rw section 36(2) of the Act 2. The said debts could not be recovered by the assessee on account of commercial reasons 3. That M/s Louis Berger ... assessee also furnished the income recognized in respect of all 9. these parties in earlier years to satisfy the compliance of provisions of Section 36(2) of the Act by stating as under:- Financial Year Revenue recognized

Bosch Rexroth (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 448/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 145ASection 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Hagglunds Drives (India) Pvt. Ltd. ( Now Merged in Bosch Rexroth (India) Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 931/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 145ASection 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Aarav Fragrance and Flavors Pvt Ltd, Thane Maharashtra vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle One Thane

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

ITA 301/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2016-17 Aarav Fragrances & Flavors Acit, Circle-1, Thane, Private Limited Maharashtra Plot A-152/153, Wagle Industrial Vs. Area, Road No. 25, Midc, Thane (West), Maharashtra-400604. Pan: Aagca 2145 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Athavale Revenue By : Dr. K.R. Subhash, Cit/Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh AthavaleFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT/DR
Section 143(2)Section 29Section 36(2)

only reason for disallowance being made by the Ld.AO/NFAC is, non-satisfaction of the conditions u/s 36(1)(vii) as well as section 36(2) of the Act. He submitted that the alternative plea of treating the above expenses, either as business expenditure or granting the same as business

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2(1), Mangalore vs. Karnataka Bank Limited., Mangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 161/PAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K., Judciial Member Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan S. & Smt. Lalitha Rameswaran, CAsFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 41(4)

section 36(1) (viia) of the Act. The provisions of section 36(1)(vii) of the Act are subject to the provisions of section 36(2) of the Act. The clause (v) of section 36(2) of the Act provides that the assessee, to which section 36(1)(viia ... debts account made under clause (viia) of section 36(1) and referred to in proviso to clause (vii) of section 36(1) and section 36(2)(v) applies to all types of advances, whether rural or other advances. It has also been interpreted that there are separate accounts in respect

M/S. Karnataka Bank Limited, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. Circle- 2(1), Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1107/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K., Judciial Member Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan S. & Smt. Lalitha Rameswaran, CAsFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 41(4)

section 36(1) (viia) of the Act. The provisions of section 36(1)(vii) of the Act are subject to the provisions of section 36(2) of the Act. The clause (v) of section 36(2) of the Act provides that the assessee, to which section 36(1)(viia ... debts account made under clause (viia) of section 36(1) and referred to in proviso to clause (vii) of section 36(1) and section 36(2)(v) applies to all types of advances, whether rural or other advances. It has also been interpreted that there are separate accounts in respect