9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 984X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - - Dated:- 23-7-2021 - Shri. B. R. Baskaran, Accountant Member And Smt. Beena Pillai, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri S.V Ravishankar, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Kannan Narayanan, JCIT ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 22/02/2019 passed by the Ld. CIT (A), Mysore on following grounds of appeal: 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Mysuru passed under section 251(1) of the Income Tax Act for AY 2012-3 in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, natural justice, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant s case. 2. The appellant denies itself li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated on the merits of the matter and ought not to have been dismissed as not pressed by the Appellant, which was on the erroneous premise that the claim was erroneous, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. Without prejudice, the learned CIT(A) was not justified in appreciating that the appellant has made a proper claim of ₹ 18,46,704/- under section 36(1)(viia) of the Act, on the facts and circumstances. 9. The appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act, in view of the fact that there is no liability to additional tax as determined by the assessing officer. Without prejudice, the rate, period and on what quantum the interest has been levied are not in accordance with the law an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... antiate its claim by with documentary evidences the addition is upheld. The other issues raised by assessee was allowed. 3.1 Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A) assessee is in appeal before us now. 4. Ground No.3-5 Ld.AR submitted that the issue was remanded by coordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee s own case in ITA no.552/Bang/2014 2000/Bang/2017 for assessment year 2008-09 by order dated 01/03/2019. He submitted that, the Ld.AO allowed the claim in the remand proceedings by ITAT while giving order effect to an order passed in assessment year 2008-09. 5. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 5.1 For year under consideration, assessee claimed expenses towards annua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cess of provision for bad and doubtful debts. 6.2 The Ld.AR drew our attention to the balance sheet placed at page 11, 15, 16 of paper book wherein a specific provision as required under section 36(1)(viia) of the act was created. He submitted that the Ld.AO went on a footing that there was no specific provision that was created by assessee is in respect of the same. At the time of hearing before the Ld.CIT(A) instead of verifying the same he submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the ground by stating that it was not pressed. 7. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 7.1 Before us the assessee had submitted that though the nomenclatures used is provision for non-performing asset bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee has used the nomenclature as provision for non performing assets but in pith and substance, the provision has been created for bad and doubtful debts and in doing so the assessee has followed the guidelines framed by Reserve Bank of India. The tribunal has therefore, affirmed the finding recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 8. This court in Canfin Homes Ltd. supra after taking note of Section 145 of the Act has held that once a particular asset is shown as non performing asset then the assumption that it is not yielding any revenue. When an asset is not yielding any revenue, the question of showing that revenue and paying tax would not arise. The contentions, which are sought to be raised by learned counsel for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
