TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be considered as his personal obligation, and having been incurred for and in the interest of the assessee, is, therefore, allowable u/s. 37(1) of the Act and same could at best be considered as a perquisite allowed by the assessee - in favour of revenue. Travelling Expenses – Held that:- Bill is for a group package, comprising lunch, rent, dinner, breakfast etc., and which would not by itself evidence or clarify the purpose for which the said expenditure was incurred, nor would the dates of arrival/departure of the group - matter be restored back to the file of the AO to allow an opportunity to the assessee to press this issue before him, furnishing all the relevant details and materials. Bad and doubtful debts written off – substantiation of its claim by the assessee - Held that:- There can be no double claim, i.e., both in the year of provision as well as in the reversal thereof when the debtor’s account stands obliterated from its account by the assessee - restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for clarifying the details which were available on the file of the AO. Deletion of sum for the relevant year - on the basis of the findings by the tribunal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al purchase, and not on capital account, so that the provision of section 43A of the Act would have no application in the instant case. The assessee is following mercantile system of accounting Under the circumstances, therefore, we have no hesitation in accepting the assessee's claim, as in the past by the tribunal (copies of its orders for the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02 being placed on record), though with a caveat, even as was found necessary by the tribunal for those years, i.e., that to the extent the claim, if any, allowed to the assessee on payment basis - which also represent assessee's alternate claim before the assessing authority, would abate or not hold. We decide accordingly, so that the Revenue fails. 4. The second ground by the Revenue is in respect of deletion of an addition in the sum of Rs. 26,68,850/-, being the amount as interest u/s. 244A allowed by the Revenue to the assessee for the assessment year 2000-01. The basis of the addition by the AO was that the relevant refund voucher, being dated 30-03-2001, stood received by the assessee only during the relevant previous year, i.e., financial year 2001-02. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the same in appeal on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndeavor in this order being to bring forth the non-clarity in the primary facts, as well as to clarify the law in the matter. We may, before parting with this issue, also clarify that, though this would not be a ground for non-inclusion of accrued (or received) interest, the assessee is entitled to deduction qua the interest granted withdrawn subsequently, i.e., in the year of its withdrawal on assessment u/s. 143(3) a separate and distinct proceedings, and to that extent, much in the same manner as where a debt in relation to an income assessed is written off or a credit in respect of a liability allowed as an expenditure is written back. We decide accordingly. 6. The third ground of the appeal by the Revenue is in respect of deletion of disallowance in the sum of Rs. 1,23,029/-, being the amount of security expenses in respect of the residence of Shri Zuber Ahmed, Managing Director of the assessee company. 7. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. While the AO disallowed the same, inferring it to be a personal expenditure, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the same, following the order by the tribunal in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2001-02, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O shall decide by issuing independent and fresh finding/s in the matter, after considering the assessee s case, including the materials relied upon in support. We decide accordingly. 10. The fifth ground by the Revenue is in respect of deletion of disallowance in the sum of Rs. 5,71,80,367/- on account of bad and doubtful debts written off. 11. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. The law in the matter is very clear, and when a debt or part thereof is written off in the assessee's books as a irrecoverable, the same is to be allowed as deduction in the year of its write off. That is, the Revenue cannot insist for demonstration of the efforts made by the assessee in realizing the debt before its write off in accounts. The only exception, which we can think of, is where the genuineness of the claim itself is in doubt a matter of fact, and not as a matter of either procedure or of law. The Revenue has no such case in the instant case. In fact, the assessee in the present case is stated to be following a regular policy, whereby it creates a provision against bad and doubtful debts when the same outstands for a period of three years. The decision for write ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
