9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 724X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Ld. assessing officer. - Decided against revenue. Apparently assessee is neither a moneylender no engaged in the banking business therefore unless such debt has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee of the previous year in which the amount of such debt or part thereof his return of all of an earlier previous year the claim of the assessee prima facie is not sustainable. Further, more if it is a business loss it shall be allowed to the assessee in terms of provisions of section 28 of the income tax act. Such losses are liable if it arises during the course of business and it has been incurred in the year in which it is claimed. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT appeal, we could not find that the claim of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udice to each other. 3. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of real estate and construction filed its return of income on 17 2010 showing income of ₹ 3 549 4475/ will stop during the course of assessment proceedings it was noted that the assessee company has claimed bad debt of Rs. One crore. The assessee submitted that an agreement to purchase the land on 12/06/2008 was executed by giving advance amount of Rs. One crore and ultimately the sale deed could not be executed as per the agreement hence the earnest money was forfeited and the same has been written off as bad debt. The assessee could not submit the agreement as it was not taxable and in absence of such agreement, the Ld. assessing officer disallowed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n considered by the Ld. CIT (A) and if it is a loss it is allowed when it is incurred and not in the year of write off. It was further submitted that there are distinct condition for a liability of the loss as well as of the bad debt, which has been totally ignored by the Ld. CIT (A). In the result it was submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is not in accordance with the law so far as the allowability of the bad debt is concerned as well as on the admission of the additional evidence in the form of agreement. 5. Despite notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore the issue is now decided based on material and facts available on record. 6. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. The Ld. CIT (A) has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hence could not submit it. The appellant stated that, the document was more than four years old and related to the payment made in an earlier assessment year (2009-10), the same could not be traced in a short span of time allowed by the AO. There was no time baring limitation on the AO to complete the assessment in hurry on 24.08.2012 when the AO had the time to complete the assessment till 31.03.2013. The appellant also relied on the decision of Electra (Jaipur) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. IAC (1988) 26 ITD 236 (Del) to emphasis that in the interest of justice, evidence should be accepted even if it is not submitted before the lower authorities to ascertain the truth. The appellant also argued that, by not paying the balance amount of agreed purchase c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore AO. Thus, it is a abundantly clear that, the appellant was not given adequate opportunity of being heard by AO and hence the additional evidence submitted before me is admitted which are crucial for adjudication of the issues raised in the grounds of appeal. In the case of CIT vs. Virgin Securities Credits P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 396 (Del.) the jurisdictional High Court held that evidence crucial in disposal of the case can be admitted. Since, the document filed by the appellant before the CIT(A) is of the nature that may advance the interest of justice and show that there was no justification for addition made, the same need to be admitted and considered. Apart from the evidentiary value of the document given, it is admissible u/r 46A, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction (2), the amount of any bad debt or part thereof which is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee for the previous year shall be allowed as deduction provided no such deduction shall be allowed unless such debt or part thereof has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee of the previous year in which the amount of such debt or part thereof is written off or of an earlier previous year, or represents money lent in the ordinary course of the business of banking or money-lending which is carried on by the assessee . Apparently assessee is neither a moneylender no engaged in the banking business therefore unless such debt has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
