<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (8) TMI 1073 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347015</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decisions on both issues. Regarding the bad debts claim, the Tribunal found the bank&#039;s write-off procedure sufficient under the Income Tax Act, emphasizing that recording bad debts as irrecoverable in the accounts is acceptable. On the excess provision issue, the Tribunal ruled that since the provision was never claimed as a deduction, section 41(1) did not apply, resulting in the dismissal of the Tax Appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Aug 2017 09:06:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486946" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1073 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347015</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decisions on both issues. Regarding the bad debts claim, the Tribunal found the bank&#039;s write-off procedure sufficient under the Income Tax Act, emphasizing that recording bad debts as irrecoverable in the accounts is acceptable. On the excess provision issue, the Tribunal ruled that since the provision was never claimed as a deduction, section 41(1) did not apply, resulting in the dismissal of the Tax Appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>