Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>High Court affirms assessee's deductions under Income Tax Act, aligning with RBI guidelines</h1> <h3>The Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhanbad Versus The Dhanbad Central Cooperative Bank Ltd.</h3> The High Court upheld the decisions of the C.I.T. (A) and the I.T.A.T., ruling in favor of the assessee on the interpretation of Section 145 of the Income ... System of accounting - as per AO bad and doubtful debts provisions are not allowable - additions made to the total income of the assessee - Held that:- C.I.T.(A) and the I.T.A.T. accepted the method of accounting of the assessee and & relying on CIT Versus Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. & others [2010 (11) TMI 88 - Delhi High Court] which was in accordance with the Instruction No.9949 of the Reserve Bank of India and therefore, addition was deleted. no question of law is involved. Loss due to embezzlement by an employee - whether treated as accidental to the business - Held that:- I.T.A.T. after relying upon the judgment of Dinesh Mills Ltd. Vs. C.I.T. (2001 (12) TMI 65 - GUJARAT High Court) and Harijan Evam Nirbal Varg Avas Vs C.I.T. reported in (1995 (12) TMI 2 - ALLAHABAD High Court) observed that the loss on account of theft be treated as business loss - no interference reuired - No question of law is involved. Issues:1. Interpretation of Section 145 of the Income Tax Act regarding accounting methods.2. Treatment of provisions for bad and doubtful debts under Section 36(i) of the Income Tax Act.3. Application of RBI guidelines and Section 45(ii) of the RBI Act in accounting practices.4. Consideration of judicial precedents in determining the treatment of accounting methods.5. Deductibility of losses due to embezzlement as business losses.6. Application of CBDT Circular on losses due to embezzlement.7. Judicial interpretations on treating losses due to theft as business losses.Analysis:1. The Assessing Officer contended that under Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, income must be realized in cash and expenses in the mercantile system. Consequently, provisions were disallowed, and an amount was added to the total income of the assessee. However, the C.I.T. (A) and the I.T.A.T. upheld the assessee's accounting method, citing the non obstante clause in Section 45(ii) of the RBI Act and following the Delhi High Court decision in a similar case. The method of accounting was found to align with RBI guidelines, leading to the deletion of the addition.2. The issue of provisions for bad and doubtful debts under Section 36(i) of the Income Tax Act was raised. The C.I.T. (A) and the I.T.A.T. accepted the accounting method based on RBI guidelines, as instructed by the Reserve Bank of India. The decision of the Delhi High Court was considered binding, and the addition was consequently deleted.3. Another issue arose concerning losses due to embezzlement, treated as business losses. The I.T.A.T. referred to the CBDT Circular, which allows such losses to be deducted in the year of discovery. Citing judgments from the Gujarat High Court and the Allahabad High Court, the I.T.A.T. concluded that losses from theft should be treated as business losses. The Tribunal's decision was upheld, and no legal question was found in the appeal.4. Ultimately, the High Court found no legal issues warranting further consideration and dismissed the appeal based on the conclusions reached by the C.I.T. (A) and the I.T.A.T. regarding the accounting methods and treatment of losses due to embezzlement.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found