ACIT 1(3), MUMBAI V. UNI DERITEND LTD LIBERTY BLDG, MUMBAI

ITA 3327/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7895 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-02-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 08-02-2010
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIRENDRA OJHA
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY THAKARE
• Keywords: Bad and doubtful debts

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES F : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.MANMOHAN, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. NO. 3327/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006 ACIT 1 (3) MUMBAI 020. VS. M/S. UNI DERITEND LTD. MUMBAI 400 020 PAN AAACU-0028-K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPELLANT : SHRI VIRENDRA OJHA, D.R. FOR RESPONDENT : SHRI AJAY THAKARE ORDER PER SHRI D. MANMOHAN, V.P. 1. THIS APPEAL, FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVEN UE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16-2-2009 PASSED B Y THE CIT (A)-XXI, MUMBAI AND IT PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005- 2006. THE ONLY GROUND URGED BY THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSE SSING OFFICER TO ALLOW BAD DEBTS AGGREGATING TO RS.44,73, 535/- AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO P RIMA FACIE PROVE THAT THE DEBT IS BAD AND WRITTEN OFF AS IRRECOVERAB LE IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER SECTION 36(1)(VII) OF THE ACT AND T HE LEGISLATION HAS NOT GIVEN THE ASSESSEE A WIDE DISCRETION TO WRITE OFF A NY DEBT AT WILL. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE DECISION O F THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INTERN ATIONAL TAXATION) VS. 2 OMAN INTERNATIONAL BANK (2009) 313 ITR 128 AND THUS SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSI ONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVEN UE THAT THE REASONS GIVEN FOR WRITING OFF ARE FALSE. IT IS NOT IN DISPU TE THAT THE DEBT HAS BEEN WRITTEN OFF IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. UNDER THE SE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE STANDS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT (SUPRA). THEREFOR E, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND DI SMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA SINGH) (D.MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MUMBAI, DT. 09 TH FEBRUARY, 2010 VBP/- COPY TO 1. ACIT 1 (3), ROOM NO. 540/564, 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K.ROAD, NEW MARINE LINES, MUMBAI 400 020. 2. M/S. UNI DERITEND LTD. LIBERTY BUILDING, SIR VIT HALDAS THACKERSEY MARG, NEW MARINE LINES, MUMBAI 400 020. PAN AAACU-0028-K 3. CIT(A)-XXI, MITTAL COURT, B WING, R.NOS. 13 & 14, 3 RD FLOOR, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400 021. 4. CIT, CITY-1, MUMBAI 5. DR F BENCH 6. GUARD FILE (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI.