TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 1043X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order of CIT(A)-38, Mumbai dated 1.7.2011. We have heard the ld. DR and the ld. Counsel. 2. Ground No.1 : The revenue has raised the following ground 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that deduction u/s.20,70,684/- on account of bad debts u/s. 3691)(viii) r.w.s. 36(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 was allowable to the assessee in resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ITAT on the issue following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shreyas S. Morakhia (342 ITR 285) . Therefore, we see no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A). Accordingly, the ground is rejected. 3. Ground No.2 is as under :- 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs..10,08,5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;ble Bombay High Court in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2006-07 wherein the Hon'ble High Court upheld the orders of ITAT following its own decision in the case of CIT vs. Angel Capital and Debit Market Ltd. in Income Tax Appeal(L) No.475 of 2011 dated 28th July,2011. Since CIT s order is in line with the principle laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in this matter, the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
