“Section 36(1)(vii)”

ACIT-19(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHEETAL JEWELLERYHOUSE LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpiaacit 19(3), Mumbai Sheetal Jewellery House Llp Room No. 513, 5Th Floor, Piramal Vs. 503/504, Brahans Business Park, Chamber, Parel Mumbai 400012 Off Mahakali, Caves Road, Andheri East, Mumbai 400093 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acqfs9693D (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रतीकीओरसे / Assessee By: Shri. Paresh Shaparia /Revenue By: Shri. Sanjeev Bhagat Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing 02.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Anikesh Banerjee [J.M]: Instant Appeal Of The Revenue Was Preferred Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld. Cit(A)"] Order Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Act"] Order Passed For The Assessment Year 2021-22 Date Of Order 25.09.2025. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The Assessment Unit Income Tax Department [Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld. Ao"], Order Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Date Of Order 26.12.2022. 2

debts of Rs.3,61,20,866/- in books of accounts. With respect to the claim of bad debts, the amended provisions of section 36(1)(vii) are reproduced hereunder: “Section 36(1)(vii) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), the amount of any bad debt or part thereof ... include any provision for bad and doubtful debts made in the accounts of the assesse" On perusal of the amended provisions of section 36(1)(vii), it is observed that Bad Debts of a business are allowable as deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) r.w.s. 36(2) which inter alia provides

IPHONLINE LIMITED (NOW AS ASAPP INFO GLOBAL SERVIES PVT LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIR-6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee's Appeal is partly allowed, in the\nabove terms

Court in the case of Catholic Syrien Bank Limited\nVs. CIT (2012) 343 ITR 270, the Assessee must prove all the\ningredients of section 36(1)(vii) and section 36(2). Proper\ndocumentation and adherence to conditions are essential for\nclaiming Bad debt deduction. The Assessee neither before the\nAssessing ... B.D.A.Ltd. Bombay in 213. ITXA-201-\n2003.doc dated 23.02.2024,Hon'ble Bombay High Court has taken similar\nview as under: Section 36(1) (vii) of the Act, which at the relevant time,\nreads as under:\n\"36(1) ........(vii) Subject to provisions of sub-section\n(2), the amount

DCIT 2(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. ICICI BANK LTD, MUMBAI

made by ld. AO, observing that the assessee was unable\nto substantiate the claim as per the provisions of section 36(1)(vii) r.w.s 36(2)\nby furnishing complete details. It was held that the assessee failed to justify the\ncondition requisite for allowance of debt ... under section 36(1)(vii)\nof the Act. The ld. AO observed that the similar issue is sub judice for the\nprevious year also.\n14.2 The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A), who had taken\ncognizance of the decision in the case

ICICI BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal is partly allowed

made by ld. AO, observing that the assessee was unable\nto substantiate the claim as per the provisions of section 36(1)(vii) r.w.s 36(2)\nby furnishing complete details. It was held that the assessee failed to justify the\ncondition requisite for allowance of debt ... under section 36(1)(vii)\nof the Act. The ld. AO observed that the similar issue is sub judice for the\nprevious year also.\n14.2 The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A), who had taken\ncognizance of the decision in the case

ALLIANCE INTERNATIONAL TOURS & TRAVELS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 22(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19

small trade balances written off in the normal course of business. 4. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim holding that the conditions of section 36(1)(vii) r.w.s. 36(2) were not satisfied and that certain amounts were in the nature of advances. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance ... from Aseel Tours & Travels and Rs.1,87,647/- being small trade balances, these represent business receivables written off. After the amendment to section 36(1)(vii), once the amount is written off in the books and arises from business, the deduction cannot be denied unless the revenue establishes that

SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT