The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.channel Guide India Ltd
High Court
01 Aug 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.channel Guide India Ltd
Date of order
01 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.channel Guide India Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: By this Appeal the Appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.19,77,374/- made by the assessing Officer on account of the bad debts b...
Decision: Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.883 OF 2007
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.883 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Channel Guide India Ltd. .. Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Appellant.
Mr.Nilesh Joshi i/by Mr.A.K.Jasani for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : 1st August, 2008
DATE : 1st August, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. By
this Appeal the Appellant is seeking to raise the
following substantial question of law:-
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal is justified in
deleting the addition of Rs.19,77,374/- made by the
assessing Officer on account of the bad debts being
claimed by the assessee without appreciating the fact
that the claim of bad debts was premature and the
assessee did not make any honest attempts to recover
the same before writing off."
2. Perused the judgment and order of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal dated 1st October, 2003. Especially
for the reasons in paragraph No.8 of the said order, the
Tribunal has clearly given a finding in favour of the
Assessee holding that the Assessee was entitled to claim
bad debts. Under these circumstances, we do not find
any substantial question of law in the above, as it is
only a finding of fact. Hence, the Appeal stands
dismissed.
(S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
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.