Section 36(2)(1) — 8 judgments | BharatTax

ORIGIN FOODS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. CORPORATE WARD 5(1) CHE, CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 337/CHNY/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs.Samantha Mullamudi, Addl

Section 133(6)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 36(2)(i)

Income Tax (Appeals) erred in stating that the appellant did not full fill the requirements of Section 36(1) (vil) read with Section 36 (2) (1) and Para 9.4 of Circular No. 12 dated 30/05/2016. 3. The Appellant submits that the conclusion of the Commissioner of Income ... year in which the amount of such debt or part thereof is written off or of an earlier previous year" as required in section 36(2)(1) of the Act. In fact, as mentioned in Para 3 and 3.1 supra, AO wanted many such things but assessee did not comply

DCIT-13(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. REMI SECURITIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6311/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

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

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH\nMUMBAI\nBEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI GIRISH

BAJAJ HOLDNGS & INVESTMENT LTD ( ERSTWHILE BAJAJ AUTO LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3043/MUM/2010[2002-013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-013

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

been written off. Accordingly, the write- off of the principal amount of inter corporate deposit is to be allowed as deduction under section 36(2)(1). This ground is therefore treated as allowed.” In the light of the above facts and findings we don’t find any reason to interfere

ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ AUTO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2899/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

been written off. Accordingly, the write- off of the principal amount of inter corporate deposit is to be allowed as deduction under section 36(2)(1). This ground is therefore treated as allowed.” In the light of the above facts and findings we don’t find any reason to interfere

PRATIK TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, Ground No. 6 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1472/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal & Pratik Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 2501, 25Th Floor, Planet Godrej, Electra Tower 3, 30 K K Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mahrashtre Pin-400 005 ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit - Cc, 658, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 Pan – Aadcp8419N ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 36(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN