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>Tax Tribunal Ruling: Interest inclusion, bonus provision, bad debt claims, entertainment deduction clarified</h1> <h3>PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK. Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER.</h3> The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of interest on sticky accounts in the assessee's income based on the Supreme Court precedent. Excess provision for bonus ... - Issues Involved:1. Inclusion of interest on sticky and doubtful accounts in income.2. Provision for bonus and its treatment in subsequent years.3. Disallowance of miscellaneous expenses.4. Treatment of pro rata interest on securities.5. Inclusion of interest on debentures in income.6. Claims for bad debts.7. Deduction on account of entertainment expenses.8. Treatment of loss on sale of stocks and shares.Detailed Analysis:1. Inclusion of Interest on Sticky and Doubtful Accounts in Income:The primary grievance of the assessee was the inclusion of Rs. 12,44,754 as interest accrued on sticky and doubtful accounts in its income. The ITO added this amount to the total income, asserting that the interest had accrued and arisen during the accounting period. The CIT(A) set aside the ITO's order, directing a re-examination based on observations from a previous year. The Tribunal upheld the addition, citing the Supreme Court's judgment in State Bank of Travancore vs. CIT, which held that income from interest on sticky advances accrues and must be included in total income. The Tribunal noted that the Supreme Court had considered CBDT circulars and still concluded that such interest should be included in income.2. Provision for Bonus and Its Treatment in Subsequent Years:The ITO added Rs. 63,089 to the assessee's income, considering it an excess provision for bonus. The CIT(A) upheld this addition. The assessee argued that this amount was offered for taxation in the following year when the bonus was disbursed. The Tribunal sustained the addition for the current year but allowed the assessee to raise an additional ground for the subsequent year to avoid double taxation. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the exclusion of this amount from the assessee's income for the subsequent year.3. Disallowance of Miscellaneous Expenses:The ITO disallowed Rs. 10,000 out of miscellaneous expenses on an estimated basis. The Tribunal reduced this disallowance to Rs. 5,000, consistent with its decision for the previous assessment year.4. Treatment of Pro Rata Interest on Securities:The ITO added Rs. 3,01,116 to the assessee's income, treating the pro rata interest on securities as a capital expenditure. The CIT(A) upheld this view. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the CIT(A) to determine whether the securities were held as stock-in-trade or as investments. If held as stock-in-trade, the interest would be a business expenditure; otherwise, it would be capital expenditure.5. Inclusion of Interest on Debentures in Income:The ITO added Rs. 17,500 to the assessee's income as interest on debentures. The assessee argued that the recovery of the principal was doubtful. The Tribunal upheld the addition, stating that income from debentures must be assessed on a due basis under Section 18 of the IT Act, regardless of the recoverability of the principal.6. Claims for Bad Debts:The assessee claimed bad debts totaling Rs. 3,21,000 for the assessment year 1978-79 and Rs. 8,64,690 for the assessment year 1979-80. The Tribunal examined each claim individually:- Electrical Machine Corpn.: The claim was rejected as the fixed assets of one partner were still available as security.- Gopal Iron & Steel Corpn.: The claim was accepted as the debt was considered irrecoverable after the sale of stocks.- Raj Kumar Ashok Kumar: The claim was accepted as the debt was written off after the pledged goods were sold.- E.M.C. Works Ltd.: The claim was rejected as the company had not lost all hopes of recovery during the accounting period.- Alpine Sales Corporation: The claim was accepted, consistent with the Tribunal's decision for the previous year.- S.R. Traders: The claim was remanded to the CIT(A) for verification of a claim with the Credit Guarantee Corporation.- Modern Industrial Corpn.: The claim was rejected as recoveries were made during the year.- Nizamuddin & Co.: The claim was rejected as a suit was filed for recovery.- Ashok Electric Co.: The claim was rejected due to recoveries made during the year.- Vijay Engg. Works: The claim was rejected as a suit was filed after the accounting period.- Shah Gur Gum Industries: The claim was rejected as the debt was secured by a house property.- Shah Agro Industries: The claim was rejected as a suit was filed for recovery.- Syndicate Motors (P) Ltd.: The claim was rejected as the debt was secured by immovable properties.- Govind Metal Industries, Sanjeev Industries, and Sky Larc Corporation: The claims were rejected as suits were pending.- P.K. Rajendra: The claim was rejected as a suit was pending and the debt was secured.- P.S.M. Steel Rolling Mills: The claim was rejected as a significant recovery was made later.- Rajmani Pandey: The claim was rejected as a suit was pending.- EMC Works (P) Ltd.: The claim was rejected for the same reasons as in the previous year.- Emkay Industries, J.P. Sharma, and Associated Enterprises: The claims were rejected as premature or unsupported by details.7. Deduction on Account of Entertainment Expenses:The CIT(A) allowed a deduction for entertainment expenses based on the scale prescribed in Section 37(2) of the IT Act. The Tribunal directed the ITO to verify whether the business income exceeded Rs. 10 lakhs to determine the allowable deduction.8. Treatment of Loss on Sale of Stocks and Shares:The CIT(A) allowed a deduction for the loss on the sale of stocks and shares, treating it as a business loss. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the CIT(A) to ascertain whether the securities were held as stock-in-trade or investments. The nature of the securities would determine whether the loss was a business or capital loss.Conclusion:The Tribunal's judgment addressed multiple issues related to the inclusion of interest on sticky accounts, treatment of bonus provisions, disallowance of miscellaneous expenses, treatment of pro rata interest on securities, inclusion of interest on debentures, claims for bad debts, deduction for entertainment expenses, and treatment of loss on sale of stocks and shares. The Tribunal upheld some additions, allowed some claims, and remanded certain issues for further verification and determination.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found