Supreme Court of India
KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION ETC. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALA
- Decided
- 11 January 1996
- Judges listed
- KULDIP SINGH
- Disposal
- Disposed off
Citations
- Official
- [1996] 1 S.C.R. 365 · 1996 INSC 49
Cited by
We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
These applications are by the respondent (revenue) in the afore noted appeals, which were disposed of by judgment dated May 12, 1994. It has been averred in these petitions that what was held in paras 9 to 15 of the judgment is not consistent with what was decided by the majority in State Bank ofTravancore v. Commissioner of Income Tax, [1986] 2 SCC 11 (158 !TR 102), which view was followed while disposing of the appeals. This stand has been taken because what the majority had held in the aforesaid case was that in cases of 'sticky advances' what could really be done is that on the assessee writing off the advances, the same would become bad debt and could be so dealt by the assessee as permitted by the relevant section of the Income Tax Act. In aforesaid paras, however, it came to be stated that on the advances become bad debts, refund of tax paid on the interest could be claimed by the assessee in accordance with law. It is apparent that the majority in State Bank of Travancore had not said so. This is not disputed by Shri Poli who had appeared for the appellants.
pp. 365–366, margin G
It is accordingly stated that the observation made relating to refund of tax in the aforesaid paragraphs of the judgment would stand deleted. Instead, we state on the advances being written off, steps could be taken by the assessee in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act reiatable to bad debts.
p. 366, margin B
The applications are disposed of with these observations. G.N. Applications are disposed of.
p. 366, margin C