Please forward this email to our *New Chartered Accountant Group.*

*Click htere to Join here -
*<http://groups.google.com/group/updateca/boxsubscribe?email=emailid>
*sent to - **[email protected]* <[email protected]>

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Raj: <[email protected]> wrote:

> Supreme Court Ruling: After 1 April 1989 the Taxpayer is not required to
> demonstrate that the debt has become bad debt once it is written off in the
> books of account [TRF Ltd. v. CIT (2010-TIOL-15-SC-IT)]
>
> *Supreme Court Ruling:*
>
> In order to claim a bad debt as a deduction under section 36(1)(vii) of the
> Income tax Act (Act) it has been a long drawn controversy between the
> Taxpayer and the Revenue whether in addition to write-off the debt in the
> books of account, it is obligatory on the Taxpayer to establish that such
> debt has become a bad debt, especially after the amendment brought in by the
> Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 w.e.f. 1 April 1989.
>
> This controversy has now been put to rest by the Supreme Court in the case
> of TRF Ltd. v. CIT wherein it has been held that after 1 April 1989 it is
> not necessary for the Taxpayer to establish that the debt, in fact, has
> become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off as
> irrecoverable in the accounts of the Taxpayer.
>
> *Our View:*
>
> The Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 substituted the words “any bad
> debt or part thereof” in place of “any debt, or part thereof, which is
> established to have become a bad debt in the previous year” in section
> 36(1)(vii) of the Act w.e.f. 1 April 1989. Subsequent to the above amendment
> the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued Circular 551 dated 23
> January 1990. The issue pertaining to bad debt is set out in para. 6.6. and
> the relevant portion reads as under :-
>
> *“In order to eliminate the disputes in the matter of determining the year
> in which a bad debt can be allowed and also to rationalise the provisions,
> the Amending Act, 1987 has amended clause (vii) of sub-section (1) and
> clause (i) of sub-section (2) of the section to provide that the claim for
> bad debt will be allowed in the year in which such a bad debt has been
> written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee.”*
>
> The Circular of the CBDT clearly spells out that the amendment is to
> eliminate the disputes in the matter of determining the year in which the
> bad debt is written off as irrecoverable. If we apply the Rule of
> interpretation as spelt out in Hyden’s case, it would lead to an
> irresistible conclusion, that the Legislature by the amendment has sought to
> exclude the burden on the Taxpayer to prove that the debt is bad debt and
> leaves it to the commercial wisdom of the Taxpayer to treat the debt as bad,
> once it is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the Taxpayer.
> Inspite of this clear provision the Taxpayer was again called upon to
> establish that the debt has become bad debt.
>
> The Supreme Court has now given a ruling in favour of the Taxpayer that it
> is not obligatory on the Taxpayer to prove whether the debt has become bad
> debt once such debt has been written off in the books of account. This is a
> welcome decision and would give a substantial relief to the Taxpayer. It
> seems that the judgement of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Kashmir
> Trading Co. v. DCIT (291 ITR 228) is overruled, while judgements of High
> Courts in the case of DIT v. Oman International Bank (313 ITR 128)(Bom) and
> CIT v. Global Capital Ltd. (306 ITR 332) (Del) are approved.
>
> Although the aforesaid judgement of the Supreme Court does not clearly
> spell out, we believe that after the amendment, though it is neither
> obligatory nor is there burden on the Taxpayer to prove that the debt
> written off by him is indeed a bad debt; the write-off needs to be *bona
> fide **and should be based on commercial wisdom or expediency.*
>
> Read more:
> http://www.taxguru.in/income-tax-case-laws/taxpayer-not-required-to-demonstrate-that-the-debt-has-become-bad-debt-once-it-is-written-off-in-the-books-of-account-sc.html#ixzz0gohLKPbS
>
>
> --
> Me on net :
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> http://rajkumaratthenet.blogspot.com/
>
> Virus Warning: Although the I have taken reasonable precautions to ensure
> no viruses are present in his email, sender (I) cannot accept responsibility
> for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachment."
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Skorydov MyTaxAssistant Member Group" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<skorydovmytaxassistant%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/skorydovmytaxassistant?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Skorydov MyTaxAssistant Member Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/skorydovmytaxassistant?hl=en.

Reply via email to