TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT Delhi Rules in Favor of Assessee on NPA Provisions and Bad Debts</h1> <h3>Jain Coop. Bank Ltd. Versus ACIT, Circle 30 (1), New Delhi</h3> The ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal and dismissed the Revenue's appeal in a case involving the addition of NPA provisions and disallowance of bad ... - Issues involved: The judgment involves the following issues: 1. Addition of &8377; 77,73,715/- on account of reversal of NPA provisions. 2. Disallowance of &8377; 28,75,204/- on account of bad debts.Issue 1: Addition of &8377; 77,73,715/- on account of reversal of NPA provisions: The Assessing Officer added the amount of &8377; 77,73,715/- as the assessee reversed NPA provisions, contending that NPAs are a general feature in the banking sector and deduction under section 36(1)(viia) is allowed when the bank actually writes off an amount considered as NPA. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, noting the excess provision for NPA created by the assessee. However, the ITAT held that since the assessee had not claimed deduction on NPA provisions in earlier years and had claimed 100% deduction u/s 80P(2) of the Act, the reversal of NPA provisions did not constitute taxable income. Thus, the ITAT directed the assessing officer to delete the addition.Issue 2: Disallowance of &8377; 28,75,204/- on account of bad debts: The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim for bad debts, stating that the provision created in earlier years was available for such debt and the income had not been taxed due to deduction u/s 80P. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, considering that the amount was actually written off and the conditions of section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2)(i) were satisfied. The ITAT agreed with the CIT(A) that the assessee was eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) on account of bad debts, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.Separate Judgement: The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.This judgment by the ITAT Delhi addressed the issues of addition of NPA provisions and disallowance of bad debts, providing clarity on the tax treatment of such provisions and debts in the context of banking operations and relevant sections of the Income Tax Act.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
