TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 939
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T(A)"], for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds: - "1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of bad debts claimed under Section 36(1)(vii) without requiring the assessee to prove the actual irrecoverability of the debt, despite the settled position that mere book entry is not sufficient to justify such a claim?" "2. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition on account of labour expenses despite the assessee's failure to furnish documentary evidence proving the authenticity of such expenses?" "3. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance of operator expenses merely based on ledger accounts without any....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for Rs. 2,23,73,875/- and also the ledger of all accounts receivable from parties which were treated as bad debts. The learned CIT(A), in compliance with Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, forwarded the evidence received from the assessee to the AO and sought the remand report. After consideration of the remand report received from the AO and submissions filed by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) vide impugned order, deleted the disallowance made on account of bad debts on the basis that after 01.04.1989 there is no requirement for the assessee to establish that the debts, in fact, have become irrecoverable. Being aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 6. During the hearing, the learned Departmental Representative ("learned D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... bad and doubtful. The assessee also has not furnished any other supporting evidences to establish its claim. Hence, the AO has correctly disallowed the claim of the assessee. Accordingly, the issue may be decided on merits." 9. There is no dispute regarding the fact that after 01.04.1989, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable, and it is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee. This position is settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in TRF Ltd. vs. CIT, reported in (2010) 190 Taxman 391 (SC). However, at the same time, it is necessary that the assessee satisfies the conditions of the provisions of section 36(2) of the Act. However, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of operator expenses. 14. We have considered the submission of both sides and perused the material available on record. During the year under consideration, the assessee claimed operator expenses of Rs. 10,12,000/-. In the absence of any documents in support of its claim, the AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) of the Act, disallowed the operator expenses amounting to Rs. 10,12,000 claimed by the assessee and added the same to the total income of the assessee. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, allowed the ground raised by the assessee on this issue by observing as follows: - "6.13 The appellant maintains accounts which are subject to audit. By AO's own admission the ledger account was produced. Therefore disallo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tical purposes. 17. The issue arising in Ground No.4, raised in Revenue's Appeal, pertains to the deletion of the disallowance of motor car and telephone expenses. 18. We have considered the submission of both sides and perused the material available on record. As the assessee failed to respond to the show cause notice issued during the assessment proceedings, the AO vide order passed under section 143(3) of the Act disallowed 10% of the motor car and telephone expenses claimed by the assessee and made an addition of Rs. 2,84,600/- to the total income of the assessee. The learned CIT(A) vide the impugned order deleted the said addition, mainly on the basis that it was ad hoc and the assessee's books of account were duly maintained....