1)       Madras High Court: CIT vs M/s V Ramakrishna & Sons Ltd: Held on Subsidiary advance written off : Held eligible business bad debt  

“''(1)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the claim of bad debts to the tune of Rs.25,98,579/- made by the assessee company in respect of money lend to its subsidiary company should be allowed as a deduction?    

(2)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the bad debt amounted Rs.25,98,579/- was deductable as a trading loss, since the writing off of the said amount was made in the course of assessee's business?... 

In the present case on hand, both the First Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal have considered the materials on record and came to the conclusion that the transactions involved are true and genuine. They have also held that the advances have been made during the course of the business and they have become irrecoverable as bad debts and hence the assessee is entitled to the benefit under Section 36 (1) (vii) of the Income Act, 1961. The said decision being based upon the findings of fact, the same cannot be agitated before this Court. The question as to whether a debt had became bad or not is a pure question of fact and therefore the same cannot be construed as a question of law.”                                 

(click here for judgment)  

2)       Karnataka High Court: CIT vs Sri Aslam Ulla khan : Reopening Dictates-Held: Reopening on dictates of CIT as apparent from reasons recorded without application of mind is bad in law.

(click here for judgment)  

3)       Kar High Court: H Mohan Lal Giriya vs ITO: Non furnishing of reasons  

Held: u/s 148 on direction of appellate court: Held reopening falls down & In two proceedings (penalty and quantum), authorities on same facts are to take same view….

(click here for judgment)