9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1086X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is appeal, the appellant-Income Tax Department has raised the following substantial questions of law. "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance of Rs. 10,86,54,376.89 being provision for non-performing assets? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in applying the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank Vs C.I.T. (323 ITR 166) wherein it was held that even if the individual debtor's account had not been written off, it was enough if the amount debited to the Profit & Loss account and the curren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot debited the amount to the Profit and Loss account. 6. The decision of the Honourable Supreme Court and the decision of this Court referred supra have settled the position and there is no further requirement for us to give a fresh decision on the Substantial questions of law. The Honourable Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and Ors [cited supra], has observed as under:- "However, as stated by the Tribunal, in the present case, besides debiting the Profit and Loss Account and creating a provision for bad and doubtful debt, the assessee-Bank had correspondingly/simultaneously obliterated the said provision from it's accounts by reducing the corresponding amount from Loans and Advances/debtors on the asset si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the light of the earlier remand order of the Tribunal dated 05.06.2006 in ITA.No.1146/Mds/00 and ITA.No.2/Mds/01. 9. In the impugned order, the Tribunal has merely relied on the Chartered Accountant's certificate dated 11.07.2005 and arrived at the conclusion based on the treatment given under similar circumstances for the subsequent assessment year. 9A. The impugned order before the Tribunal itself was pursuant to an earlier order passed by the ITAT dated 05.06.2006 in ITA.No.1146/Mds/00 & Int.T.A.No.2/Mds/01. By the aforesaid order, the Tribunal had referred the case back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in the light of the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant that a sum of Rs. 10,86,54,377/- has actually been wri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
