https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429759 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant, a business of Ayurvedic veterinary medicines, for the assessment year 2011-12. The Tribunal held that the addition of provision for doubtful debts to book profits under section 115JB was not justified, as it had already been disallowed by the assessee, resulting in a double addition. The decision was based on the argument that the provision for doubtful debts was an ascertained liability and should not be considered under Explanation 1 to section 115JB. en-us Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Nov 2022 10:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429759 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant, a business of Ayurvedic veterinary medicines, for the assessment year 2011-12. The Tribunal held that the addition of provision for doubtful debts to book profits under section 115JB was not justified, as it had already been disallowed by the assessee, resulting in a double addition. The decision was based on the argument that the provision for doubtful debts was an ascertained liability and should not be considered under Explanation 1 to section 115JB. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429759