Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
TAXAP/1585/2009 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX
APPEAL No. 1585 of 2009
=========================================================
COMMISSIONER
OF INCOME TAX-II - Appellant(s)
Versus
HARI
ORGOCHEM PVT LTD - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MRS
MAUNA M BHATT for
Appellant(s) : 1,
None for Opponent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE
MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
Date
: 28/03/2011
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
Revenue
is in appeal against the judgement of the tribunal dated 28.11.2008
raising following question for our consideration :
“Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) deleting the disallowance on account of bad
and doubtful debt amounting to Rs.19,61,510/- of the Act?”
Issue
arises in the following manner. Assessee during the assessment year
in question had claimed bad debts of Rs.19,61,510/-. Assessing
Officer disallowed such claim and added same in the income of the
assessee. Assessee carried the issue in appeal before CIT(Appeals).
CIT(Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee and upheld his claim
for bad debts. Simultaneously, however, CIT(Appeals) noticed that a
sum of Rs.6.20 lakhs was received by the assessee out of the said
claim of bad debts. CIT(Appeals) therefore, though while accepting on
facts case of the assessee with respect to bad debts and thereby
disagreed with the view of the Assessing Officer, granted relief to
the extent of net balance of Rs.13,40,712/-. Revenue as well as
assessee both carried the judgement of CIT(Appeals) before the
tribunal which came to be disposed of by common judgement dated
28.11.2008. Revenue’s appeal was dismissed. Assessee’s appeal was
allowed.
With
respect to claim of assessee of bad debts, we find that CIT(Appeals)
as well as tribunal both on facts found that case of the assessee was
genuine. In absence of any perversity pointed out to us, we are not
inclined to interfere with such factual findings. No question of law
is therefore, arising for our consideration. Tax Appeal is therefore,
required to be dismissed.
Before
closing, however, we may note that this order is limited to the
question of Revenue’s appeal before the tribunal and validity of
common order of the tribunal allowing assessee’s appeal shall be gone
into separately.
With
above observations, tax appeal is dismissed.
(Akil
Kureshi,J.)
(Ms.
Sonia Gokani,J.)
(raghu)
Top