Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 724 - AT - Income TaxAllowability of the bad debt claim - whether CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee after admitting the additional evidence under rule 46A ? - Held that:- In the present case, the claim of the assessee is that that assessee has executed an agreement to purchase the land on 12/06/2008 by giving advance amount of Rs. One crore and ultimately the sale deed could not be executed and therefore the assessee has claimed the loss of earnest money as bad debt.We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT appeal with respect to admission of the additional evidences in the form of agreement which assessee could not submit before the Ld. assessing officer. - Decided against revenue. Apparently assessee is neither a moneylender no engaged in the banking business therefore unless such debt has been taken into account in computing the income of the assessee of the previous year in which the amount of such debt or part thereof his return of all of an earlier previous year the claim of the assessee prima facie is not sustainable. Further, more if it is a business loss it shall be allowed to the assessee in terms of provisions of section 28 of the income tax act. Such losses are liable if it arises during the course of business and it has been incurred in the year in which it is claimed. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT appeal, we could not find that the claim of the assessee is examined on these aspects. Therefore we set aside ground No. 1 and 2 of the appeal of the revenue back to the file of the Ld. CIT (A) to decide the issue of afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee and if need arises to the Ld. assessing officer also. In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed with above direction.
|