https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12839 The dominant issue was whether an unrecovered loan could be deducted as a bad debt for the relevant AY, notwithstanding the assessee's failure to institute a civil suit for recovery. The HC held that persistent non-recovery over several years sufficiently established the debt as bad, and that filing a suit is not a legal precondition for allowance where the assessee reasonably considers litigation futile and financially burdensome. Accordingly, the Tribunal's rejection lacked justification and the deduction was allowable as bad debt; the alternative claim as business loss under s. 28 became academic, and the question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. en-us Mon, 24 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Jan 2026 22:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12839 The dominant issue was whether an unrecovered loan could be deducted as a bad debt for the relevant AY, notwithstanding the assessee's failure to institute a civil suit for recovery. The HC held that persistent non-recovery over several years sufficiently established the debt as bad, and that filing a suit is not a legal precondition for allowance where the assessee reasonably considers litigation futile and financially burdensome. Accordingly, the Tribunal's rejection lacked justification and the deduction was allowable as bad debt; the alternative claim as business loss under s. 28 became academic, and the question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 24 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12839