https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16975 The court ruled against the assessee, stating that the evidence did not support the conclusion that the debts had become bad. The Tribunal's deletion of the disallowance was deemed unjustified as there was insufficient proof of irrecoverability. Shyamal Kumar Sen J. agreed with the decision, emphasizing that recovery proceedings are not necessary to determine bad debts, but rather the chance of recovery. In this case, lacking evidence showed the debts were irrecoverable. The Tribunal's decision lacked justification due to insufficient material proving the debts had become bad or irrecoverable. en-us Mon, 23 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:21:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16975 The court ruled against the assessee, stating that the evidence did not support the conclusion that the debts had become bad. The Tribunal's deletion of the disallowance was deemed unjustified as there was insufficient proof of irrecoverability. Shyamal Kumar Sen J. agreed with the decision, emphasizing that recovery proceedings are not necessary to determine bad debts, but rather the chance of recovery. In this case, lacking evidence showed the debts were irrecoverable. The Tribunal's decision lacked justification due to insufficient material proving the debts had become bad or irrecoverable. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 23 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16975