Income Tax : Explore recent Supreme Court rulings (2023) on income tax issues. Highlights of key cases, analysis, and implications....
Income Tax : Section 36 – Other Deductions Section 36 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, provides a list of explicit deductions for computin...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court, has held in CIT vs. Samara India(P) Ltd. (2013) 216 Taxman 93 , following the decision of Supreme Court in T...
Income Tax : In this discussion, we would take up Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and analyse the provision therein from all fa...
Income Tax : ection 55 (2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides the option to the assesse to consider the fair market value of capital asset...
Income Tax : The ITAT Bangalore confirmed that an initial order's failure to consider a binding High Court ruling on bad debt deductibility c...
Income Tax : Loss of ₹7.66 Crore was allowable as bad debt deduction under Section 36(1)(vii), recognising the loss as a genuine business los...
Income Tax : The Mumbai ITAT upheld the deletion of a disallowance for bad debts, confirming that deductions under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1...
Income Tax : The Tribunal confirmed a co-operative banks use of a mixed accounting system (mercantile/receipt basis) for NPA interest, prioriti...
Income Tax : Tribunal held that write-off of ₹9.56 crore foreign investment in USA subsidiary was incurred for commercial expediency and busi...
The ITAT Bangalore confirmed that an initial order’s failure to consider a binding High Court ruling on bad debt deductibility constitutes a mistake apparent from record. This allowed the bank to claim a deduction under Section 36(1)(vii) for non-rural bad debts via rectification, dismissing the Revenue’s appeal. The key takeaway is that disregarding settled jurisdictional law is a rectifiable error, not a debatable issue.
Loss of ₹7.66 Crore was allowable as bad debt deduction under Section 36(1)(vii), recognising the loss as a genuine business loss arising from NSEL’s operational suspension.
The Mumbai ITAT upheld the deletion of a disallowance for bad debts, confirming that deductions under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) are independent. The ruling followed the Supreme Court’s precedent, allowing the entire bad debt written off since no double deduction was claimed.
The Tribunal confirmed a co-operative banks use of a mixed accounting system (mercantile/receipt basis) for NPA interest, prioritizing consistency and adherence to RBI/NABARD prudential norms over the AOs theoretical objection. This ruling solidifies that regulatory requirements trump mechanical accounting changes.
Tribunal held that write-off of ₹9.56 crore foreign investment in USA subsidiary was incurred for commercial expediency and business expansion, qualifying as business loss under the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Chennai allows a partnership firm to claim a bad debt deduction of ₹23.10 lakh, ruling that losses from employee fraud are a genuine business loss. The decision highlights that an FIR and book entries are sufficient evidence.
ITAT Mumbai held that trade receivable shown as net of provision for doubtful debts would not be hit by section 115JB(i) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, addition of provision of bad and doubtful debts to book profits computed u/s. 115JB not sustained.
ITAT Cochin has ruled that banks can claim a bad debt deduction under Section 36(1)(vii) even if their claim under Section 36(1)(viia) is disallowed. This is a crucial precedent.
ITAT Mumbai held that consulting charges is revenue item and accordingly, foreign exchange loss arising thereon is allowable as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, appeal of revenue dismissed.
ITAT Cochin dismisses Vellanikkara Service Co-op. Bank’s appeal regarding disallowance of gratuity provision, citing grounds not raised before CIT(A).
