Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JAMNAGAR Versus JAMNAGAR DISTRICT CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD

2016 (6) TMI 600 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Penalty under section 271(A)(c) - difference in bad and doubtful debts claimed - Held that:- The issue of the assessee's larger claim of deduction of bad and doubtful claims had to be resolved through opinion of the third member of the Tribunal. Clearly the issue of taxability was debatable. But apart from this, the Tribunal found that there was no concealment of income on the part of the assessee. All facts were on record to enable the Assessing Officer to make addition if he was of the opinion .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d in favour of the assessee - TAX APPEAL NO. 365 of 2015 - Dated:- 9-6-2016 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. A.J. SHASTRI, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MR Harnish V Darji for MR. PRANAV G DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR THE OPPONENT : MR B S SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) The Revenue has filed this appeal which was admitted on 21.7.2015 . We framed the substantial question of law for our consideration as under: (A) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

age advances by the rural branch of the bank. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had made provision only of ₹ 3.50 crores by way of bad and doubtful debts while claiming the deduction under this head at ₹ 12.28 crores. After putting the assessee to notice, in the order of assessment dated 30.12.2011, the Assessing Officer restricted the deduction to ₹ 3.50 crores and ordered initiation of penalty proceedings. 3. The quantum addition came to be decided by the Tribunal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onsidered highly debatable. The assessee has disclosed full facts before lower authorities and only question is about the quantum of deduction is available to the assessee. In the present set of facts, the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and therefore penalty cannot be sustained. Even otherwise on merits of the case, we have held in the quantum order in appeal No.63/Rjt/2013 that the assessee is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bts only of ₹ 3.50 crores but claimed much larger amount by way of deduction under section 31(1)(viia) of the Act. The assessee raised such claim year after year. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel Mr. Soparkar for the assessee submitted that there was no concealment of the income on the part of the assessee. The issue itself was highly debatable requiring resolution through opinion of the third member of the Tribunal. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal correctly deleted the penal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version