9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 670X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t allow deduction of Rs. 1,73,51,790/- claimed by the appellant in respect of notional interest taxed as income in earlier year, which was not realized by the appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case as gathered from the order of lower authorities are that the assessee is a corporate entity, engaged in the business of manufacturing of insecticides, pesticides and its formulation and intermediates, filed its return of income for relevant assessment year declaring total loss of Rs. 6.72 Crore under the normal provisions of Income tax Act and book profit under section 115JB at nil. The case was selected for a scrutiny. During the assessment the assessee filed revised return of income and claimed bad debts/business loss of Rs. 1.73 crore on accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notional interest is covered against the assessee by the order of jurisdictional Tribunal dated 27th March 2012, copy of which was placed on record. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) also extracted the relevant paragraph of order of Tribunal in Para 3 of impugned order. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 4. We have heard the submission of learned authorised representative (AR) of assessee and the learned departmental representative (DR) for revenue and perused the orders of lower authorities carefully. The learned AR of the assessee submits that assessee made inter corporate deposit with Nippon investment Private Limited. The assessing officer made the addition of notional interest income in si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n alternative submission the learned AR for the assessee submits that if the claim is not considered as bad debts, the same having been assessed at the business income in the past, is also considered to be allowable as a business loss under section 28 as the same has become irrecoverable and unrealized during the year under consideration, only principal amount could be recovered. In support of his submission the learned AR of the assessee relied upon the following decisions: Deoniti Prasad Singh v. CIT- 15 ITR 165 (Patna), CT Narayanan Chettiar v. CIT- 60 ITR 690 (Madras), Dinesh Mills Ltd. v. CIT (122 Taxman 384 (Gujarat), Shiv Narayan Karmendra Narayan cs v. CIT 277 ITR 27 (Allahabad). 6. On the other hand the learned DR for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal interest is covered against the assessee by the order of Tribunal. We have noted that for claiming the said amount the assessee has not fulfilled the condition prescribed under section 36(2) for claiming bad debts meaning thereby the assessee has not offered the said notional income as its income in earlier years. Hence, the assessee is not eligible for deduction of bad debts. Similarly, it was never the claim of the assessee that the inter corporate deposit was given for business purpose. Even otherwise, the assessee is not in money lending, therefore, the assessee cannot claim that the assessee made inter corporate deposit in the course of his business. During the earlier years the assessee never claimed as a business loss on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
