https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459010 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee bank regarding taxation of bad debt recovery under section 41(4). The assessee argued that since bad debts were adjusted against provisions under section 36(1)(viia) without claiming deduction under section 36(1)(vii), recovery should not be taxed. ITAT held that where no deduction was allowed for bad debts written off, recovery cannot be charged to tax. The addition proposed by AO was improper as revenue authorities failed to properly verify the actual deductions claimed and their impact on tax computation. en-us Wed, 13 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Nov 2024 08:50:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459010 ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee bank regarding taxation of bad debt recovery under section 41(4). The assessee argued that since bad debts were adjusted against provisions under section 36(1)(viia) without claiming deduction under section 36(1)(vii), recovery should not be taxed. ITAT held that where no deduction was allowed for bad debts written off, recovery cannot be charged to tax. The addition proposed by AO was improper as revenue authorities failed to properly verify the actual deductions claimed and their impact on tax computation. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459010