<?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>Provision for Doubtful Debts Cannot Be Deducted Under Section 115-JB Without Actual Write-off in Books</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86022</link>
    <description>HC upheld revision under s.263 regarding treatment of provision for doubtful debts in computing book profits under s.115-JB. AO&#039;s acceptance of assessee&#039;s claim was mechanical, without examining why provision for doubtful assets was claimed as deduction despite not being debited to provision account. Amount was merely shown as reduction from trade receivables for disclosure, not as written-off debts. Assessee maintained recovery hopes. PCIT&#039;s jurisdiction exercise directing re-examination was justified. Tribunal correctly analyzed legal position, finding no illegality in CIT&#039;s order. HC found no jurisdictional infirmity, ruling against assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:24:04 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:24:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=801396" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Provision for Doubtful Debts Cannot Be Deducted Under Section 115-JB Without Actual Write-off in Books</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86022</link>
      <description>HC upheld revision under s.263 regarding treatment of provision for doubtful debts in computing book profits under s.115-JB. AO&#039;s acceptance of assessee&#039;s claim was mechanical, without examining why provision for doubtful assets was claimed as deduction despite not being debited to provision account. Amount was merely shown as reduction from trade receivables for disclosure, not as written-off debts. Assessee maintained recovery hopes. PCIT&#039;s jurisdiction exercise directing re-examination was justified. Tribunal correctly analyzed legal position, finding no illegality in CIT&#039;s order. HC found no jurisdictional infirmity, ruling against assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:24:04 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86022</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>