← All Phrases

“Section 36(1)(viia)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)445 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(viia) is Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (347 ITR 272), cited in 516 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(viia)

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
347 ITR 272 · 2012 · High Court
516
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income earned. The Assessing Officer must record satisfaction regarding the assessee's accounts before making any disallowance.

South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT
438 ITR 1 · 2021 · Supreme Court
508
citing judgments

The mixed fund theory is affirmed, holding that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A can be made if the assessee possesses sufficient non-interest bearing funds, such as capital and reserves, to cover investments made in tax-free securities.

Vijaya Bank v. CIT
323 ITR 166 · 2010 · Supreme Court
392
citing judgments

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.

Southern Technologies Ltd. v. JCIT
320 ITR 577 · 2010 · Supreme Court
353
citing judgments

The case concerns the allowability of deductions for provisions made under Section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, especially those related to bad and doubtful debts. It distinguishes such deductions from the recognition of interest income on non-performing assets (NPAs).

Calcutta Co. Ltd. v. CIT
37 ITR 1 · 1959 · Supreme Court
341
citing judgments

When following the mercantile system of accounting, provisions for liabilities made on a scientific and rational basis are allowable as deductions, even if their actual quantification and discharge are deferred to a future date.

Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. v. CIT
343 ITR 270 · 2012 · Supreme Court
326
citing judgments

For a bad debt deduction under Section 36(1)(vii), the debt must be actually written off as irrecoverable in the assessee's accounts, distinct from merely making a provision for bad and doubtful debts. The assessee bears the onus to satisfy the conditions under both Section 36(1)(vii) and Section 36(2) of the Income-tax Act.

United Commercial Bank v. CIT
240 ITR 355 · 1999 · Supreme Court
314
citing judgments

Liabilities accrued on a notional basis are allowable as deductions under the mercantile system of accounting even if their exact quantification or discharge is deferred to a future date or if the demand itself is disputed.

M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT
436 ITR 582 · 2021 · Supreme Court
308
citing judgments

Amendments to tax law that impose new obligations or change existing legal positions apply prospectively, even if stated to be "for the removal of doubts." The judgment also clarifies that deductions under Section 43B are allowed only on actual payment, overriding the mercantile system of accounting.

Judgments citing Section 36(1)(viia)

Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Satara vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Satara

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

ITA 2/PUN/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, V The Acit, Satara. S Satara. 179, Bhawani Peth, Rajpath, Satara – 415001. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaajj0029N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte – Ar Revenue By Smt Sonal L Sonkavde –Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 01.11.2024, Emanating From Order U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 28.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A(2)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

Loss Account does not constitute additional income. Ld.CIT(A) noted that however the Assessing Officer treated the said amount as a claim under section 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act. Ld.CIT(A) ITA No.2/PUN/2025 [A] has merely brushed the contention of the Assessee that the amount of Rs.42 ... less than the figure of Rs.1,27,98,078/- which is undisputed figure of deduction worked out as per provision of Section 36(1)(viia) at the rate of ten percent of average rural branches advances as per working shown in the Tax Audit Report. Thus Rs.96