Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2012 (11) TMI 135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....espect of deletion of disallowance in the sum of Rs. 1,97,32,129/-, being additional liability claimed by the assessee on account of foreign exchange fluctuation, i.e., due to devaluation of Indian currency. Though the assessee cited the decision by the Tribunal in its own case for athe ssessment year 1990-91, as well as that by the hon'ble apex court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 1 (SC) in its favour, the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the same in view of the past history, whereby such loss was being allowed on payment basis, even as the assessee admittedly follows mercantile system of accounting. In appeal, the assessee relied upon, in addition, a host of the decisions, including by the Special Bench of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee for the assessment year 2000-01. The basis of the addition by the AO was that the relevant refund voucher, being dated 30-03-2001, stood received by the assessee only during the relevant previous year, i.e., financial year 2001-02. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the same in appeal on the basis that the said refund was in fact not granted. The said refund having been withheld as per CIT letter no. 2281 dated 28-03-2001, and the interest u/s. 244A allowed in Intimation u/s. 143(1)(a), subsequently withdrawn, i.e., on the framing of the assessment for the relevant year on 26-03-2003.   5. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. The primary facts of the case, as we see it, are not clear. The only manner whereby it....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the refund amount against outstanding demand that the refund and, thus, the interest can be said to have been allowed to the assessee. The primary facts, as afore-stated, being not clear, we only consider it fit and proper that the matter is restored back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication, bringing all the material facts on record, per a speaking order, after allowing due opportunity to the assessee to state its case; our endeavor in this order being to bring forth the non-clarity in the primary facts, as well as to clarify the law in the matter. We may, before parting with this issue, also clarify that, though this would not be a ground for non-inclusion of accrued (or received) interest, the assessee is entitled to deduction....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ddition in the sum of Rs. 1,63,104/-, qua the assessee's claim for traveling expenses made in the sum of Rs. 2,50,83,486/-. The AO disallowed the same, being ostensibly in respect of a conference (by the SAP Team) held on 30-06-2001 at Neemrana Fort Palace, Neemrana, as the assessee could not support its claim for the same with any evidence, viz. of it being the SAP program of the assessee-company, by way of a workshop or conference thereon for its employees. The ld. CIT(A), however, allowed the same on the basis that the bill produced in its respect confirmed the dates of arrival and departure to fall within the relevant previous year, so that it was considered to be for the purpose of business. 9. We have heard the parties, and perused t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t or part thereof is written off in the assessee's books as a irrecoverable, the same is to be allowed as deduction in the year of its write off. That is, the Revenue cannot insist for demonstration of the efforts made by the assessee in realizing the debt before its write off in accounts. The only exception, which we can think of, is where the genuineness of the claim itself is in doubt - a matter of fact, and not as a matter of either procedure or of law. The Revenue has no such case in the instant case. In fact, the assessee in the present case is stated to be following a regular policy, whereby it creates a provision against bad and doubtful debts when the same outstands for a period of three years. The decision for write off is made su....