9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontention of the ld. D.R. The impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) on this issue is accordingly set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for verifying the claim of the assessee made for the first time before the Tribunal and decide the issue accordingly. Ground No. 1 of the assessee s appeal is accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Provision made for diminution in the value of quoted shares in the earlier years - HELD THAT:- We direct the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee of having not claimed any deduction in the earlier years on account of the provision made for diminution in the value of quoted shares and if it is found correct on such verification, the Assessing Officer shall delete the addition made on account of write back of the said provision in the year under consideration while computing the total income of the assessee under the normal provisions of the Act. Ground No. 2 of the assessee s appeal is accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Set off and carry forward of brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation - HELD THAT:- Since the ld. D.R. has also agreed for sen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,80,00,000/- A.Y. 2009-10 ₹ 1,75,00,000/- A.Y. 2010-11 ₹ 1,50,00,000/- On specific query raised by the Assessing Officer, it was explained by the assessee that efforts were being made to recover the amount receivable from M/s. Elbee Services Limited and as agreed mutually between the assessee and the said party, the amount receivable in part was written off as bad debts in different years. This explanation offered by the assessee was not found satisfactory by the Assessing Officer. According to him, the action of the assessee in writing off the concerned debt only in part as per the mutual understanding with the concerned debtor could not fulfil the conditions stipulated in section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2) of the Act as it clearly amounted to a devise reducing the taxable profit of the assessee-company. He accordingly disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- on account of bad debts in the assessment completed under section 143(3) dated 28.03.2013. 4. The disallowance ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. At the time of hearing before the Tribunal, ld. Representatives of both the sides have agreed that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal rendered in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 vide its order dated September 22, 2017 passed in ITA No. 383/KOL/2015, wherein the action of the ld. CIT(Appeals) in deleting the similar disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of bad debts written off comprising the part amount receivable from M/s. Elbee Services Limited was upheld by the Tribunal for the following reasons given in paragraph no. 6 of its order:- 6. As regards the revenue s appeal, it is observed that the issue involved therein relating to the assessee s claim for deduction on account of bad debts written off is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. (supra) as rightly held by the Ld. CIT (A). Even the CBDT has accepted this position and issued a circular no 12/2016 on 30.05.2016 directing that if any appeal is already filed by the revenue on this issue before any Court or Tribunal, the same may be withdrawn. We accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdingly dismissed as not pressed. 9. As regards the issue involved in Ground No. 1 relating to the disallowance of ₹ 10,77,574/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii), the limited contention raised by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that no exempt income was actually earned by the assessee during the year under consideration and, therefore, the disallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) is not sustainable. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, has contended that this claim is being made on behalf of the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal and, therefore, the Assessing Officer may be given an opportunity to verify the same. We find merit in this contention of the ld. D.R. The impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) on this issue is accordingly set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for verifying the claim of the assessee made for the first time before the Tribunal and decide the issue accordingly. Ground No. 1 of the assessee s appeal is accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 10. As regards the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
