2012 (3) TMI 719

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Anirudh Rai, CIT represented on behalf of the Revenue. 2. In assessee's appeal, there are two grounds and the first ground is against treating foreman's dividend of ₹ .3,32,50,750/- as income of the assessee. 3. The assessee is engaged in the business of chit fund, filed its return of income on 29.09.2008 showing total income at NIL and book profit at ₹ .40,70,038/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act on 14.12.2010 determining income at ₹ .23,82,39,440/-. 4. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer brought to tax foreman's dividend of ₹ .3,32,50,750/- on the ground that foreman commission is income in the hands of the assessee a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for A.Y. 1997-98 in ITA No. 45/Mds/2001 dated 17.02.2006. Aggrieved, the assessee went before the CIT(A), who also did not give any relief to the assessee. Hence assessee is in appeal before us. 3. Before us, it has been again pleaded that assessee is entitled to exemption of tax on foreman's dividend but this Bench has been taking consistent view in assessee's own case that such dividend earned when company has subscribed to chits conducted by itself and has also received dividend, the same is not exempt from tax. Therefore, by following the consistent view taken by this Bench, we cannot allow this ground of the assessee." Respectfully following this decision, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee for the impugned assessment year also.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rd. We find no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. I.T.A. No. 1297/Mds/11: 13. The first issue in the appeal of the Department is against deleting disallowance of bad debts of ₹ .21,45,81,730/- by CIT(A). 14. The Assessing Officer while completing the assessment disallowed bad debts of ₹ .21,45,81,730/- claimed by the assessee. 15. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee stating that this issue was already adjudicated by this Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 1632/Mds/2003 in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2000-01. 16. At the time of hearing, both the parties have submitted tha....