← All Phrases

“Section 36(1)(viia)(c)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)(c)66 judgments

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2763/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

assessee in the books of account subject to limit of 5% of total income in accordance with the provisions of section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act. Section 36(1)(viia) (c) provides that an assessee being a public financial institution or a state financial corporation or a state ... Assessing Officer on the specific query is extracted below: 5. This issue pertains to deduction claimed by the assessee under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of Income Tax Act. In this regard, it is pertinent to mention that the said issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD., KASTURBA NAGAR

ITA 609/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nMs. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI.\nBEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nand\nSHRI

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , C.R. BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

ITA 579/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI.\nBEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nand\nSHRI

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , CR BUILDING ITO vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

ITA 578/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI.\nBEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nand\nSHRI

JCIT(OSD), RANGE-10, NEW DELHI , ITO C.R. BUILDING vs. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LTD. , KASTURBA NAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in the AY 2020-21 and AY\n2021-22 are dismissed

ITA 577/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI.\nBEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nand\nSHRI

REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 320/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI.\nBEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

REC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT-10 (OSD), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 319/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nDELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI.\nBEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nand\nSHRI

INDIA INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI

ITA 5552/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2026AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

terms of\nsection 36(1)(viia) of the Act is allowed to make provisions for bad in\ndoubtful doubts in terms of section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act where 5%\nof the total income is allowed to be made as provision.\n16. It is further observed that

JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE -10(1), DELHI vs. M/S INDIAN INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1251/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Shery Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 861

computed on the total income before making deduction u/s 36(1)(viii) of the Act, the same being against the provisions of section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act which stipulates calculation of total income for the purpose of the said section before making any deduction under the said ... Allowable deduction u/s 36(1) (viia) (c) of the Act (5% of 43,08,54,038/- income before allowing deduction under section 36(1)(viia) (c) of the Act) i.e. 5% of (C) Accordingly, your honour will acknowledge and appreciate the fact that the deduction claimed by the assesse

NATIONAL HOUSING BANK,DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 16(1) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 4695/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalnational Housing Bank Vs Dcit Core-5A, 3Rd-5Th Floor, Indian Circle 16(10 Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcn2600H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Ms. Anju Goel, Ca Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/12/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

Section 144BSection 147Section 36(1)(viia)

1 National Housing Bank Vs. DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE YOGESH

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

ITA 3173/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

r.w.s.36(2) of the Act.\nThe assessee also claimed an amount of Rs.81,73,55,929/- as provision for\ndoubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act at 5% of total income. The\nAO held that the claim of bad-debts under section 36(1 ... noticed that the assessee in the AY 2015-16 has claimed a deduction of Rs.\n84,46,95,341/- under section 36(1)(viia)(c) and therefore held that the said amount\nought to have been carried as credit balance in the current AY i.e. AY 2016-17.\nThe

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

ITA 3160/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

assessee also claimed an amount of Rs. 81,73,55,929/- as provision for doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act at 5% of total income. The AO held that the claim of bad-debts under section 36(1)(vii) is subject to the restriction ... noticed that the assessee in the AY 2015-16 has claimed a deduction of Rs. 84,46,95,341/- under section 36(1)(viia)(c) and therefore held that the said amount ought to have been carried as credit balance in the current

SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(3)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 2971/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

r.w.s.36(2) of the Act.\nThe assessee also claimed an amount of Rs.81,73,55,929/- as provision for\ndoubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act at 5% of total income. The\nAO held that the claim of bad-debts under section 36(1 ... noticed that the assessee in the AY 2015-16 has claimed a deduction of Rs.\n84,46,95,341/- under section 36(1)(viia)(c) and therefore held that the said amount\nought to have been carried as credit balance in the current AY i.e. AY 2016-17.\nThe

SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(3)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 2970/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

assessee also claimed an amount of Rs. 81,73,55,929/- as provision for doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act at 5% of total income. The AO held that the claim of bad-debts under section 36(1)(vii) is subject to the restriction ... noticed that the assessee in the AY 2015-16 has claimed a deduction of Rs. 84,46,95,341/- under section 36(1)(viia)(c) and therefore held that the said amount ought to have been carried as credit balance in the current

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

ITA 2943/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

assessee also claimed an amount of Rs. 81,73,55,929/- as provision for doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act at 5% of total income. The AO held that the claim of bad-debts under section 36(1)(vii) is subject to the restriction ... noticed that the assessee in the AY 2015-16 has claimed a deduction of Rs. 84,46,95,341/- under section 36(1)(viia)(c) and therefore held that the said amount ought to have been carried as credit balance in the current

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

ITA 2894/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

assessee also claimed an amount of Rs. 81,73,55,929/- as provision for doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act at 5% of total income. The AO held that the claim of bad-debts under section 36(1)(vii) is subject to the restriction ... noticed that the assessee in the AY 2015-16 has claimed a deduction of Rs. 84,46,95,341/- under section 36(1)(viia)(c) and therefore held that the said amount ought to have been carried as credit balance in the current

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

ITA 2893/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

r.w.s.36(2) of the Act.\nThe assessee also claimed an amount of Rs.81,73,55,929/- as provision for\ndoubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia)(c) of the Act at 5% of total income. The\nAO held that the claim of bad-debts under section 36(1 ... noticed that the assessee in the AY 2015-16 has claimed a deduction of Rs.\n84,46,95,341/- under section 36(1)(viia)(c) and therefore held that the said amount\nought to have been carried as credit balance in the current AY i.e. AY 2016-17.\nThe

HUDCO LTD. (HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD),NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 7218/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI vs. HUDCO LTD. (HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 6829/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4 , NEW DELHI vs. HUDCO LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 2063/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Showing 1–20 of 66 · Page 1 of 4