Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 1607 - ITAT KOLKATAAddition u/s 68 - additional income disclosed before the Settlement Commission - addition of peak balances - Held that:- While arriving at the additional income disclosed before the Settlement Commission, the peak balances in various undisclosed bank accounts were worked out by the assessee and the revised balance sheets in question were prepared. Thus, the claim of the assessee made before the Settlement Commission was accepted by the Assessing Officer. For the financial year ending 31/03/2008, the closing cash balance is ₹ 30,23,746/-. This figure was not disturbed by the Assessing Officer and the additional income declared by the assessee before the Settlement Commission was taken as income. Hence the submission for the assessee has force. We accept the same and consider that the source of funds for deposits aggregating to ₹ 20,62,298/-, made during the year, as explained by the opening cash balance of the year. - Decided in favour of assessee Provision for bad debts allowability - Held that:- What was created was a provision for doubtful debts. It is not a case where the bad debts were written off in the accounts. On the contrary, the provision for doubtful debts continues to be in the accounts and is reflected in the balance sheet. The decision in the case of Vijaya Bank V. CIT [2010 (4) TMI 46 - SUPREME COURT ] as a case where the loans and advances, which was provisioned for, were actually written off and this figure of loans and advances were reduced from the asset side of the balance sheet. No such netting off is done in the case on hand. Though the provision is made for an identified debt, these debts were not written off and do appear in the balance sheet of the assessee.- Decided against assessee
|