TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 2159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the sake of brevity. 2. Grounds of appeal for AYs 2013-14,2014-15 and 2015-16 are as below: ITA No. 287/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2013-14) 1. The learned CIT(A) 54, Mumbai erred in confirming the Act of the Ld. AO of issuing notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 without appreciating the facts of the case in right perspective. 2. The Learned CIT(A) 54, Mumbai erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 80,80,000/- u/s 68 of the Act, 1961 without appreciating the facts of the case in the right perspective. ITA No. 288/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) 1. The learned CIT(A) 54, Mumbai erred in confirming the Act of the Ld. AO of issuing notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 without appreciating the facts of the case in right perspective. 2. The Learned CIT(A) 54, Mumbai Erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,28,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act, 1961 without appreciating the facts of the case in the right perspective. 3. The Learned CIT(A) 54, Mumbai Erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,13,81,400/- on account of fictitious losses without appreciating the facts of the case in the right perspective. 4. The Learned CIT(A) 54, Mumbai Erred in confirmin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for deciding the issues involved. 4.1 We have gone through the relevant additional evidences filed and find that they pertain to Unsecured loans treated as bogus by the AO, Broker memos, Share valuation certificates, Broker memos with respect to F&O losses as well. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the materials available on record. In our opinion, the new evidences although furnished by the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal, are relevant and go to the root of the present controversy. The said documents were not available before the ld.AO and the ld.CIT(A) as admitted by the ld.AR. As per the provisions contained in Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, the parties to the appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence either oral or documentary before the Tribunal. The provisions contained in the said rule are pari materia with the Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which also does not allow the party to the appeal to adduce any additional evidence unless and until such exceptional circumstances are set out. In the instant case, the assessee could not furnish these docum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s during assessment and appellate proceedings, with a direction to deposit the same to the Income Tax Department within 15 days of this order. 5. Since we have set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and case is remanded back to the AO, therefore, all the aforesaid grounds in ITA No.287/288 and 289 of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only. 6. ITA No. 290/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17) 1. The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing an amount of Rs. 1,19,02,269/- comprising without appreciating the fact that the same is clearly allowable under section 36(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act'). 2. The learned CIT(A) 54, Mumbai erred in confirming the Act of the Ld. AO of issuing notice under section 148 of the Act, 1961 without appreciating the facts of the case in right perspective. ITA No. 291/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) 1. The Learned CIT(A)-54 Mumbai has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,19,02,269/- claimed as Bad Debts without confronting the appellant with the evidence gathered from Jurisdictional Learned AO of Shri Ashok Sudha Chatterji. 2. Without prejudice the above ground, the Learned CIT(A)-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance merely on the ground that the assessee did not possess documentary evidence to prove adequate recovery measures made by it. The ld.AR has drawn attention to the provisions of section 36(2) and 36(i)(vii) of the Act and also CBDT Circular no.12/2016 dated 30.05.2016 allowing such a claim. It is further stated that the said advance was not being paid by the borrower since 2011 March onwards though he agreed to pay in near future. It is further submitted that there was also an announcement in newspapers by Canara Bank and PNB to treat the borrower as NPA. In fact, PNB initiated auction of his properties as evident from news paper clipping submitted. The assessee also sent legal notice to him in March 2016 as final warning but the letter sent returned back unserved with the remark 'Left'. It was therefore, considered prudent to write of the said loan. The ld.AR has placed reliance on the various Court decisions in the cases of CIT vs Star Chemicals(Bombay) P.Ltd 203 ITR 11(Bom),CIT vs Elgi Equipments 151 Taxmann.com 428(SC),TRF vs CIT, CIT vs Padma Bora in 54 Taxmann.com319(Bom), Pepsico India Holdings in ITA No.147/Del/2010(Del-ITAT),Summit Investme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en written off in the books of accounts of assessee which is advanced in the ordinary course of business of assessee. The Courts have also been taking this view consistently. 9.2 The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in CIT vs Smt. Padma S. Bora in (2015) 54 Taxmann.com 319 has held as reproduced here under: "5. Having perused this paragraph carefully, we find that the Tribunal may have committed a mistake in erroneous reproduction of the Commissioner's findings, but that does not mean that the Appeal would raise any substantial question of law. The allowability of bad debts was a claim considered in depth by the Commissioner and eventually granted in favour of the Assessee. The Assessee is engaged in the business of money lending. Merely because the Assessee does not have license to conduct this business, does not mean that the claim of bad debts should be denied. The Commissioner has in relation to this claim held in his order at paragraph 4.2 that the Tribunal's order in the case of B.N. Khandelwal v. ITO [2007] 16 SOT 343 (Mum.), would assist the Assessee inasmuch as the amount is lent in ordinary course of money lending business. It was written off after mak....