Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 4, Mumba...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 4, Mumbai v. M/S.oasis Securities Limited

High Court 04 Sep 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 4, Mumbai v. M/S.oasis Securities Limited
Date of order
04 Sep 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax- 4, Mumbai v. M/S.oasis Securities Limited, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is thus dismissed with no order as to costs.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.495 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax- 4, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus M/s.Oasis Securities Limited ..Respondent. Mr.P.S. Sahadevan i/by Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.Ms.Beena Pillai i/by Thakordar & Madgavkar for the respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE : 4TH SEPTEMBER 2009 P.C. : 1.The Appeal was admitted by order dated 13-8-2008 on the following substantial question of law: a)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal by relying on the judgment of the special bench of ITAT in Oman International Bank (reported in 100 ITD 285) was correctt in holding that, it is not obligatory on the part assessee to prove that the debt written off by him is indeed a Bad Debt for the purpose of allowance u/s 36(1)(vii) ? b)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in relying on the judgment of Special Bench of ITAT in Oman International Bank, in allowing the bad debts u/s. 36(i)(vii), in spite of the fact that the assessee did not fulfill the conditions laid down under Section 36(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ? 2.The learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that issue sought to be raised in this appeal is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) V/s. M/s.Oman International Bank SAOGreported in (2009) 313 ITR 128 (Bom). 3.In the light of that, there is no merit in this appeal. The question is accordingly answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The appeal is thus dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, J.) (V.C. Daga, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan