2014 (12) TMI 631 - HC - Income Tax

Substantial questions of law framed for adjudication by HC Held that - The appeal challenges the order passed by the Tribunal substantial questions of law admitted for adjudication regarding the provision for bad and doubtful debts service of notice waived decided in favour of revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
2. Substantial questions of law regarding addition to Book Profit for provision of doubtful debts
3. Interpretation of Explanation 1(i) to section 115JB
4. Treatment of provision for bad and doubtful debts in calculating book profit

Analysis:

The High Court of Bombay heard an appeal challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated May 18, 2012, in Income Tax Appeal Nos. 1073 and 1078/Mum/2005. The appeal raised substantial questions of law related to the addition to Book Profit concerning provisions for doubtful debts. The court admitted the appeal based on the questions of law presented, specifically focusing on the interpretation of certain legal provisions and precedents.

The first substantial question of law addressed whether the ITAT was correct in deleting the addition to the Book Profit for the provision of doubtful debts, citing a decision of the Karnataka High Court. The court considered the relevance of Explanation 1(i) to section 115JB, which specifies the treatment of amounts set aside as provisions for diminution in the value of assets in calculating net profit for book profit purposes. The court analyzed the implications of this provision in light of the Karnataka High Court decision.

The second substantial question of law examined whether the Tribunal was correct in disregarding that the provision for bad and doubtful debts signifies a diminution in asset value, necessitating its addition back to the book profit of the Assessee. The court referred to a decision of the Karnataka High Court favoring the Revenue on a similar issue. The court delved into the interpretation of legal principles and case law to determine the appropriate treatment of such provisions in the calculation of book profit.

Regarding question (c), the court noted that the issue raised had already been settled in favor of the Assessee by a previous judgment of the court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The Respondent waived service, and the court directed the Registrar to summon the original record from the Tribunal for inspection and further proceedings, emphasizing compliance with procedural rules.

In conclusion, the High Court of Bombay thoroughly analyzed the legal issues surrounding the addition to Book Profit for provisions of doubtful debts, interpreting relevant statutory provisions and case law to determine the correct treatment of such provisions in calculating the book profit of the Assessee.