https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401298 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the ld.CIT(A)'s decisions on both issues. For the disallowance under section 14A r.w Rule 8D, the Tribunal upheld the ld.CIT(A)'s reduction of the disallowance to Rs. 53,373, finding no infirmity. Regarding the bad debt claim of Rs. 1,73,37,301, the Tribunal agreed with the ld.CIT(A) that the conditions for deduction were met, as the debts were written off in the accounts. The Tribunal found the assessee's explanations satisfactory and upheld the ld.CIT(A)'s reliance on legal precedents, thereby rejecting the Revenue's appeal on both counts. en-us Tue, 08 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Nov 2024 13:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401298 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the ld.CIT(A)'s decisions on both issues. For the disallowance under section 14A r.w Rule 8D, the Tribunal upheld the ld.CIT(A)'s reduction of the disallowance to Rs. 53,373, finding no infirmity. Regarding the bad debt claim of Rs. 1,73,37,301, the Tribunal agreed with the ld.CIT(A) that the conditions for deduction were met, as the debts were written off in the accounts. The Tribunal found the assessee's explanations satisfactory and upheld the ld.CIT(A)'s reliance on legal precedents, thereby rejecting the Revenue's appeal on both counts. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 08 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401298