| Case ID |
1ff17514-0f3a-4d00-ac9e-abd2464afc12 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
IT APPEAL NO. 57 OF 2003 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 21, 2006 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was allowed, reversing the Tribunal's order which required the provision for doubtful debts to be added back to profits for determining the book profit under section 115J. The Board of Directors had the authority to ascertain the extent of doubtful debts, and their provision should not have been questioned by the Assessing Officer. The decision emphasized the necessity of respecting the directors' assessment of liability and the validity of their accounting practices. It was held that the amount retained to cover known liabilities could not be added back to profits solely because it was not written off as an actual bad debt. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the interpretation of Section 115J of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning provisions for doubtful debts. The Gauhati High Court addressed the appeal of Amines & Plasticizers Ltd., which contested the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision that mandated the addition of Rs. 11,52,221 to the profits for the purpose of computing the book profit. The court highlighted that the board of directors is the best authority for determining the extent of doubtful debts and emphasized that their decision should stand unless there is clear justification for questioning it. The judgment reinforced the distinction between provisions for ascertained liabilities and reserves, underscoring the principle that provisions made against known liabilities should not be treated as reserves for taxation purposes. This case is significant for corporate entities in understanding their liabilities and the proper accounting treatment under the Income Tax Act, particularly in the context of provisions for doubtful debts. Keywords: Income Tax Act, Section 115J, doubtful debts, corporate accounting, provisions vs reserves. |
| Court |
Gauhati High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
|
| Judges |
D. Biswas,
U.B. Saha
|
| Lawyers |
Dr. A.K. Saraf,
D. Baruah,
Ms. M.L. Gope,
Ms. N. Hawelia,
S. Chetia,
Ms. A. Goyal,
U. Bhuyan
|
| Petitioners |
Amines & Plasticizers Ltd.
|
| Respondents |
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
|
| Citations |
2008 SLD 2758,
(2008) 296 ITR 727
|
| Other Citations |
Deputy CIT v. Beardsell Ltd. [2000] 244 ITR 256,
State Bank of Patiala v. CIT [1996] 219 ITR 706,
National Rayon Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 764 (SC),
CIT v. Echjay Forgings P. Ltd. [2001] 251 ITR 15 (Bom)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
115
|