This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
No addition u/s 41(1) for unclaimed stale Drafts / Pay Orders if liability to pay back not ceased
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- CIT & ACIT Vs Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank (Karnataka High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2007-08 & 2008-09
- Courts
- All High Courts, Karnataka High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Brief of the Case
Karnataka High Court held In the case of CIT & ACIT vs. Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank that Section 41(1) attracted when an allowance or deduction is sought to be made in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability is incurred by the assessee. In the instant case, the sum of Rs.58,38,581/- has remained with the assessee owing to the fact that the payees or holders of the draft/pay orders had not encashed them. The language employed by the legislature being unambiguous, it would be incongruous to construe the said sum as either a loss, expenditure or trading liability ...
