2014 (11) TMI 506 - HC - Income Tax

Claim of bad debts disallowed Evidences produced by assessee or not Whether the claim of the assessee seeking allowance for debts written off as irrecoverable, irrespective of whether they are written off after 180 days or after 120 days as per the changed management policy in respect of each assessment year - Held that - In TRF. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 2010 (2) TMI 211 - SUPREME COURT the issue related to claim of bad debts written off discussed and it was held that when bad debt occurs, the bad debt account is debited and the customer s account is credited, thus, closing the account of the customer - In the case of companies, the provision is deducted from sundry debtors - The judgment was delivered on 9.2.2010 it has been clearly held that after 1st April 1989, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable - It is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee - bad debts if written off, on the accounts of the assessee and appropriately claimed before the competent authority, the authorities are bound to consider the same as decided by the Hon ble Supreme Court the matter is remitted back to the limited purpose - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of bad debt claims.
2. Treatment of software development expenses as capital or revenue in nature.
3. Disallowance of professional services expenses.
4. Requirement to account for interest on overdue debts.
5. Tribunal passing an ex-parte order.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Bad Debt Claims:
The primary issue across all appeals is whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was correct in disallowing the appellant's claim of bad debts written off as irrevocable in the books of account. The appellant argued that after the amendment to Section 36(1)(vii) effective from 01.04.1989, it was sufficient to write off the bad debt in the books without needing to prove that the debt had become bad. The Tribunal, however, maintained that the debt must be genuinely bad and not just written off based on the appellant's management policy. The Tribunal's decision was challenged based on the Supreme Court's judgment in TRF Ltd vs Commissioner of Income Tax (2010) 323 ITR 397, which clarified that post-1989, it was unnecessary for the assessee to establish the debt's irrecoverability, and writing it off in the books sufficed. The High Court agreed with this interpretation and remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court's decision.

2. Treatment of Software Development Expenses:
The Tribunal treated software development expenses as capital in nature, which was contested by the appellant. The High Court noted that the Tribunal did not provide reasons for dismissing the appellant's reliance on the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs Southern Roadways Ltd (288 ITR 15 Mad). Consequently, the High Court remanded this issue to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for reconsideration.

3. Disallowance of Professional Services Expenses:
The Tribunal disallowed expenses incurred by the appellant for professional services rendered by Citibank N.A., despite proper bills being provided. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision without providing further analysis, indicating agreement with the Tribunal's findings.

4. Requirement to Account for Interest on Overdue Debts:
The Tribunal upheld the findings that the appellant needed to account for interest on debts overdue for more than 90 days, which were written off as bad debts after 120 days. The High Court noted that this issue should be reconsidered in light of the substantive issue relating to bad debts and remanded it for further examination.

5. Tribunal Passing an Ex-Parte Order:
In T.C.A.No.184 of 2014, the appellant contended that the Tribunal passed an ex-parte order despite a reasonable request for adjournment. However, this issue was not pressed by the appellant's counsel during the High Court proceedings and was deemed unnecessary to address due to the remand order.

Conclusion:
The High Court remanded the matters related to the disallowance of bad debts, treatment of software development expenses, and the requirement to account for interest on overdue debts to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for reconsideration. The decision on professional services expenses was upheld, and the issue of the ex-parte order was not addressed further. The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with no costs.

← Previous Next →