← All Phrases

“Section 36(2)(viia)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(2)(viia)4 judgments

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADD/JOINT/DEPUTY/ACIT, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

ITA 569/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18
Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(ii)Section 36(2)(viia)

that the bad debts\nallowable on advances made as per provisions of section 36(2)(ii) have to be done in\ncompliance with section 36(2)(viia) and no such deduction can be allowed if the\nprovisioning has been made for business other than banking business.\"\n7\n\"Whether ... that the bad debts\nallowable on advances made as per provisions of section 36(2) (v) have to be done in\ncompliance with section 36(2) (viia) and no such deduction can be allowed if the\nprovisioning has been made for business other than banking business.\n11.\nWhether

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4056/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(ii)Section 36(2)(viia)

that the bad debts\nallowable on advances made as per provisions of section 36(2)(ii) have to be done in\ncompliance with section 36(2)(viia) and no such deduction can be allowed if the\nprovisioning has been made for business other than banking business.\"\n7\n\"Whether ... that the bad debts\nallowable on advances made as per provisions of section 36(2) (v) have to be done in\ncompliance with section 36(2) (viia) and no such deduction can be allowed if the\nprovisioning has been made for business other than banking business.\n11.\nWhether

CAPIQAL CONSULTANCY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,PANVEL MUMBAI vs. DCIT , PANVEL

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

ITA 482/MUM/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Capiqal Consultancy Vs. Dcit, Service Private Limited, Panvel, 1107, Post Sai Village, Mumbai - 410206 Bhomnagar Taluka Panvel, District Raigarh Palghar, Mumbai-410206 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacm4143K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt
Section 143(2)Section 270ASection 40

doubtful debts account made under that clause.” 5. After referring the aforesaid provision the AO stated that as per provision of Section 36(2)(viia) no debt will be allowed to be written off in the current financial years unless the provisions were made in the previous financial year

AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR-1

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 203/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT
Section 115JSection 263Section 35ASection 36(1)(viia)

computing the deduction under Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. The relevant extract of the aforesaid instructions has been reproduced below: “(iii) Section 36(2)(viia) (a) of the Act provides that in respect of any provisions for bad and doubtful debts of the type referred to in that