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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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 :

        2013 (11) TMI 265 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        Tribunal upholds stock write-offs and losses for appellant based on consistent accounting practices and justifiable decisions. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, upholding the claims for stock write-offs and losses incurred during the relevant assessment year. The ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                          Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                              Tribunal upholds stock write-offs and losses for appellant based on consistent accounting practices and justifiable decisions.

                              The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, upholding the claims for stock write-offs and losses incurred during the relevant assessment year. The decision was based on the appellant's consistent accounting practices, justifiable business decisions, and the absence of contradictory material from revenue authorities. The Tribunal emphasized the appellant's adherence to accounting policies, previous successful appeals, and the appellant's ability to substantiate losses, leading to the allowance of the claims.




                              Issues:
                              1. Disallowance of claim in respect of stock written off by the appellant
                              2. Justification of claim of write off of stock in respect of Vipul Securities
                              3. Admissibility of loss as business loss
                              4. Business decision taken by the assessee in claiming the loss
                              5. Applicability of Tribunal's previous orders in similar cases

                              Issue 1: Disallowance of claim in respect of stock written off by the appellant

                              The appellant raised grounds against the CIT (A) confirming the AO's decision of disallowing the claim in respect of stock written off. The AO disallowed a significant amount out of the total claim made by the appellant, stating that the appellant failed to provide evidence to substantiate that the loss had specifically arisen during the relevant previous year. The AO emphasized that the onus lies on the assessee to prove the loss occurred during the year. The Tribunal observed that the appellant consistently followed an accounting policy of writing off shares lost due to various reasons, such as wrong deliveries and fake certificates. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s order, emphasizing the business decision taken by the appellant and the absence of contrary material brought by the Department, thereby allowing the claim.

                              Issue 2: Justification of claim of write off of stock in respect of Vipul Securities

                              The appellant contested the disallowance of the claim for write off of stock in respect of Vipul Securities by the AO. The appellant argued that the stock was found to be fake certificates, leading to a loss. The Tribunal noted that the appellant consistently analyzed its stock position and quantified losses for debiting to the profit and loss account. The Tribunal found that the appellant had provided a list of securities involved in bad deliveries and fake certificates, along with reasons for the write-offs. The Tribunal held that the appellant had discharged the primary onus, and as the revenue failed to rebut the appellant's evidence, the claim was justified. The Tribunal set aside the CIT (A)'s order in favor of the appellant.

                              Issue 3: Admissibility of loss as business loss

                              The appellant contended that the loss incurred was incidental to business and should be allowed as a business loss. The AO and CIT (A) had raised concerns about the lack of evidence to prove the loss specifically arose during the relevant year. However, the Tribunal, relying on previous orders and the appellant's consistent accounting practices, found that the loss was a result of business decisions taken by the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant's analysis and decision-making process regarding stock write-offs were justifiable business practices, leading to the allowance of the claim.

                              Issue 4: Business decision taken by the assessee in claiming the loss

                              The Tribunal highlighted the importance of considering the business decisions made by the appellant in claiming the loss. It noted that the appellant had a consistent accounting policy regarding stock write-offs, indicating a deliberate and informed approach to managing losses related to wrong deliveries and fake certificates. The Tribunal appreciated the appellant's business acumen and upheld the claim based on the appellant's demonstrated understanding of their business operations.

                              Issue 5: Applicability of Tribunal's previous orders in similar cases

                              The Tribunal extensively referenced its previous orders in the appellant's own case for different assessment years. It noted that the appellant had been consistently following accounting practices regarding stock write-offs, which were upheld in previous decisions. The Tribunal reiterated that the appellant's approach to analyzing and quantifying losses for stock write-offs was a valid business decision. By aligning with its earlier judgments, the Tribunal confirmed the allowance of the appellant's claims, emphasizing the importance of consistent business practices in such matters.

                              In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee based on the justifiability of the claims, the business decisions taken, and the consistent accounting practices followed by the appellant. The Tribunal's decision was supported by the appellant's evidence and the absence of contradictory material from the revenue authorities, leading to the allowance of the appellant's claims regarding stock write-offs and losses incurred during the relevant assessment year.
                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found