https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118396 The ITAT Bangalore dismissed the appeal, affirming the validity of the revised return filed by the assessee and allowing the claim of bad and doubtful debts. The CIT(A) had previously ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the revised return was valid despite being filed after an intimation, which is not equivalent to an assessment. Additionally, the CIT(A) upheld the allowance of the debts, emphasizing that a bona fide write-off, in accordance with section 36(1)(vii), is permissible regardless of whether the debts had become bad in a specific year. en-us Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jan 2024 12:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118396 The ITAT Bangalore dismissed the appeal, affirming the validity of the revised return filed by the assessee and allowing the claim of bad and doubtful debts. The CIT(A) had previously ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the revised return was valid despite being filed after an intimation, which is not equivalent to an assessment. Additionally, the CIT(A) upheld the allowance of the debts, emphasizing that a bona fide write-off, in accordance with section 36(1)(vii), is permissible regardless of whether the debts had become bad in a specific year. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118396