<?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>2014 (9) TMI 1240 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296964</link>
    <description>Provision for non-performing assets was not allowable as a deduction under the normal provisions because a mere bad debt or doubtful debt provision did not satisfy the statutory conditions. The transfer to special reserve was added back in computing book profit under section 115JB, as it remained a reserve and not a provision for ascertained liability. By contrast, the debenture redemption reserve was treated as a provision for a known liability and was not added back. The provision for non-performing assets was required to be added under section 115JB, but interest under sections 234B and 234C could not be levied on that retrospective MAT adjustment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2021 21:22:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=652694" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 1240 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296964</link>
      <description>Provision for non-performing assets was not allowable as a deduction under the normal provisions because a mere bad debt or doubtful debt provision did not satisfy the statutory conditions. The transfer to special reserve was added back in computing book profit under section 115JB, as it remained a reserve and not a provision for ascertained liability. By contrast, the debenture redemption reserve was treated as a provision for a known liability and was not added back. The provision for non-performing assets was required to be added under section 115JB, but interest under sections 234B and 234C could not be levied on that retrospective MAT adjustment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>