9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enior Standing Counsel For the Respondent : M/s. Sumithra for M/s. R.Sivaraman JUDGMENT DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J. The Revenue has filed this Appeal under Section 260-A of the Act raising the following purported substantial questions of law arising from the order of the learned Tribunal dated 11.08.2016:- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether the ITAT is correc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Director representing the workmen on the Board of the Company, who was dealing with the day today affairs of the Company business. Upon such embezzlement being found out by the internal audit procedure, he was not only removed from the Board of Directors, but was also prosecuted by filing a criminal complaint in the Court of XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai, which is said to be still pending. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether it could be allowed as a bad debt or not? For the purpose of claiming a debt as bad, the conditions prescribed under Section 36(2) of the Act have to be complied with. In the case before us, the conditions prescribed under Section 36(2) of the Act were not complied with, therefore, the claim of the Assessee cannot be allowed as bad debt. However, it is a loss suffered in the course of busi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions prescribed under Section 36(2) of the Act to claim the said deduction by way of bad debt were not complied with by the Assessee and also since there was a legal opinion obtained by the Assessee that the amount embezzled is recoverable, the same had therefore not turned as bad debt. It was urged that the learned Tribunal had erred in allowing the same as business loss in the hands of the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iting off the same as a business loss. 8. In our opinion the learned Tribunal had rightly held it to be a business loss as it was treated to be only a pilferage of the company funds by an employee or a Director on the Board of Company. Therefore, such findings of facts by the Tribunal do not give rise to any substantial question requiring our further consideration under Section 260-A of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
