2014 (7) TMI 1063

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 10,77,651/- made by the A.O. on account of claim of bad debts, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record by the Assessing Officer. 2. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 2,50,719/- out of disallowance of Rs. 4,80,020/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of prior period expenses, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record by the Assessing Officer. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) ought to have upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer. 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) may be set aside and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ied upon by the ld.counsel for the assessee. The AO disallowed the bad debts on the basis that such debt has become bad and irrecoverable. The ld.counsel for the assessee drew our attention towards the findings of the ld.CIT(A) who has given a finding that the Chartered Accountant has given a certificate mentioning that all the bad debts written off are relating to trade of the Company and income referring to those has been offered for tax in earlier years and impugned debts have been written off in the year under consideration. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd.(supra) that after the amendment of section 36(1)(vii) of the Income tax Act, 1961, with effect from April 1, 1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has given a finding on fact in para-4.3 of his order as under:- "4.3. I have carefully considered the findings of the A.O. as well as the submission of the appellant in this regard. The appellant submitted that "out of the said Rs. 4.8 lacs, Rs. 1,690,585/- relate to purchases of components, the same entering the stocks during the year upon the purchases made, cannot be considered as disallowable prior period expenses and there is another identical amount Rs. 90,134/- of Courrier DHL Worldwide, which amount had been in dispute was ultimately settled towards the end of the year and considered as expenditure upon settlement and payme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X