<?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>2006 (1) TMI 111 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9948</link>
    <description>HC affirmed Tribunal&#039;s finding that deduction under section 36(1)(vii) for bad debts was disallowed because there was no material showing the debtors were unable or unwilling to pay. The assessee continued trading with the debtors and received payments; the write-offs were unilateral and unsupported by evidence of irrecoverability. Consequently the debts had not become bad and the claimed deduction was rightly denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2025 18:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=48970" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 111 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9948</link>
      <description>HC affirmed Tribunal&#039;s finding that deduction under section 36(1)(vii) for bad debts was disallowed because there was no material showing the debtors were unable or unwilling to pay. The assessee continued trading with the debtors and received payments; the write-offs were unilateral and unsupported by evidence of irrecoverability. Consequently the debts had not become bad and the claimed deduction was rightly denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9948</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>