2017 (2) TMI 1010

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in granting to assessee deduction for bad debts u/s.36(1)(vii) of the Act on assessee's contention that deduction u/s.36(1)(viia) for provisions for bad debts was never claimed nor allowed in earlier year which ascertain of assessee is factually incorrect and has not been looked into specifically by the appellant commissioner?" 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 29.09.2011 declaring total income to the tune of Rs. 25,95,50,255/-. The return of income was processed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short "the Act"). The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act dated 02.08.2012 was issued and duly served upon the assessee. Further, notice u/s.142(1) of the Act....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the order of the CIT(A) is wrong against law and facts and is liable to be set aside. However, on the other hand the learned representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the order passed by the CIT(A). Before going further, it is necessary to advert the finding of the CIT(A) on record:- "2.4 I have perused the facts of the case and provisions of law. The assessee is a co-operative bank and till A.Y.2007-08, was not eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(viia). Nevertheless, as per RBI guidelines, it was creating a provision for bad debts by debiting the P&L A/c. However, while filing the return this provision was being added back to the gross total income. During the year, the assessee has claimed a sum of Rs. 17,41,56,007/....