Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (10) TMI 159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... part of section 36(2)(i) of the Act is concerned, in the present case it is assessee’s submission that the amount of ₹ 5,13,088/- represents the sale of waste and scrap which was credited to the P&L A/c. in the year of sale. We find that no details of the year of sale has been furnished by the assessee either before AO or ld.CIT(A) or before us. Assessee has merely made a submission that the amount represents sale. Similarly, as far as the assessee’s claim of having given advance payment for purchase of raw-material of ₹ 11,56,495/- is concerned, no details of the same have been furnished by the assessee. Further, in the present case, assessee has not furnished details in support of its contention of having fulfilled the condit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... teel Re-rolling Mill and Weighbridge. Assessee filed her return of income for AY 2008-09 on 27/08/2009 declaring total income of ₹ 11,20,690/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) vide order dated 27/12/2010 and the total income was determined at ₹ 27,90,270/-. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer (AO), assessee carried the matter before the ld.CIT(A), who vide order dated 15/02/2012 (in Appeal No.CIT(A)/XX/614/10-11) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal before us. 2.2. On the date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of appellantassessee, h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under:- 2.2. I have considered the submissions made by the A.R. of the appellant and the observations of the assessing officer in the assessment order. For the detailed reasons mentioned at para-5 of the assessment order, AO disallowed the balance written off in respect of M/s.Satyanaran Steel Rolling Mill. In the written submissions it is claimed that part of the amount written off represented sales made to the party and the balance represented advances towards purchases from the party. As regards alleged sales made, appellant has not been able to substantiate that such sales formed part of appellant s income in the earlier years. Hence the provisions of sec. 36(2) are not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... could not be recovered by the assessee and the sales of which were credited in the books of accounts in earlier years. As far as the writing off of balances amount of ₹ 16,69,583/- is concerned, it was submitted that it represents the advances given by the assessee towards purchases of raw-materials in earlier assessment years which could not be recovered. Assessee also relied on the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 323 ITR 397 and submitted that the assessee s claim be allowed. Ld.Sr.DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of AO ld.CIT(A) and submitted that assessee has not furnished any details before any of the authorities including the Tribunal about the compliances of the conditions .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ncerned, no details of the same have been furnished by the assessee. Further, in the present case, assessee has not furnished details in support of its contention of having fulfilled the conditions specified u/s.36 of the Act for claiming deduction. We further find that before us, assessee has claimed that the issue is covered in her favour by the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of TRF Ltd.(supra). We find that there is no finding on the same by ld.CIT(A) in his order. We find that Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd.(supra), has observed that after the amendment of section 36(1)(vii) w.e.f. 01/04/1989 in order to obtain a deduction in relation to bad debts, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates