https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103350 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the provisions for diminution in value of investments and doubtful loans and advances should not be considered as reserves but as provisions for computing deemed income under section 115J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal distinguished between provisions and reserves based on commercial accountancy principles, emphasizing that provisions are charges against profits for anticipated losses or contingencies, while reserves are appropriations of profits not meant for liabilities. The Tribunal rejected the lower authorities' view and allowed the appeal, concluding that the Assessing Officer was unjustified in adding the provisions to compute deemed income. en-us Mon, 08 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:47:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103350 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the provisions for diminution in value of investments and doubtful loans and advances should not be considered as reserves but as provisions for computing deemed income under section 115J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal distinguished between provisions and reserves based on commercial accountancy principles, emphasizing that provisions are charges against profits for anticipated losses or contingencies, while reserves are appropriations of profits not meant for liabilities. The Tribunal rejected the lower authorities' view and allowed the appeal, concluding that the Assessing Officer was unjustified in adding the provisions to compute deemed income. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103350