<?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>2017 (9) TMI 2059 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467116</link>
    <description>Section 41(4) applies only where the corresponding bad debt had earlier been allowed as a deduction under section 36(1)(vii); where the assessee&#039;s earlier income was exempt and no such deduction was allowed, later recovery is not taxable under section 41(4). Applying that principle, the ITAT Mumbai held that recovery of bad debts could not be brought to tax in the absence of an earlier deduction and deleted the addition. The Tribunal also admitted an additional claim relating to later recoveries and remitted it to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination because the claim had not been considered below and the relevant facts were already on record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2026 20:54:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=889218" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 2059 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467116</link>
      <description>Section 41(4) applies only where the corresponding bad debt had earlier been allowed as a deduction under section 36(1)(vii); where the assessee&#039;s earlier income was exempt and no such deduction was allowed, later recovery is not taxable under section 41(4). Applying that principle, the ITAT Mumbai held that recovery of bad debts could not be brought to tax in the absence of an earlier deduction and deleted the addition. The Tribunal also admitted an additional claim relating to later recoveries and remitted it to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination because the claim had not been considered below and the relevant facts were already on record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467116</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>