9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Disallowance of bad debt claim of Rs. 27,412 paid to M/s Sumerchand & Co.
Analysis: The assessee appealed against the disallowance of a bad debt claim of Rs. 27,412 paid to M/s Sumerchand & Co. The plea was based on the untraceability of the consignee, who had allegedly closed down the business due to heavy demands from creditors and the Department of Revenue. The assessee's effort to contact their counsel for information was also highlighted. The CIT(A) considered the assessee's business practice of allowing consignees to take delivery without immediate payment to maintain good relations, but the party in question defaulted, indicating bad intentions. The assessee cited legal precedents to support the claim. The Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities' decisions. The Tribunal carefully reviewed the arguments and evidence presented regarding the bad debt claim. The CIT(A) noted the assessee's failure to take timely action to recover the debt from M/s Sumerchand & Co., emphasizing the violation of established procedures and trust obligations. Despite the irrecoverable nature of the debt, the assessee's lack of legal action was deemed insufficient grounds for denial. The Tribunal acknowledged the legal transaction with the party and the past honoring of commitments, indicating a normal business practice. The claim was allowed based on the debt's irrecoverability, disregarding procedural oversights under commercial laws not within the Revenue authorities' purview. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for the bad debt, emphasizing the debt's irrecoverable status and normal business practices between the parties. The decision highlighted that the claim could not be denied solely due to procedural lapses under commercial laws, as the debt's bad nature warranted allowance. The appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.
|
