Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the amount paid by the assessee under section 42(1) on behalf of the non-resident principal, and found irrecoverable, was an allowable deduction either as a bad debt under section 10(2)(xi) or as a business loss.
Analysis: The liability arose because the assessee carried on business with the non-resident and was therefore statutorily treated as his agent. The payment was not a voluntary discharge of another's liability unrelated to the business, but one directly connected with the assessee's own business operations. The statutory obligation attached only by reason of the business connection, so the resulting claim against the non-resident had the requisite nexus with the business. Even if the item did not strictly answer the description of a debt, it was still a loss incidental to the trading activity and had to be taken into account in computing true ? profits.
Conclusion: The amount was an admissible deduction under the Income-tax Act, either as a bad debt or as a business loss, and the answer to the reference was in the affirmative.
Ratio Decidendi: A liability compulsorily discharged by an assessee because of a business connection with a non-resident has sufficient nexus with the assessee's business to qualify as an allowable deduction when the corresponding recovery becomes irrecoverable.