1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 55/2010. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Nagpur -VERSUS- M/s. Bachhuka Brothers, Akola. _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 15, 2011. Heard Shri A. Parchure, learned Counsel for appellant and Shri N.S. Bhattad, learned Counsel for respondent. Perused the assessment order as also orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Contention that debt was not bad as only period of 24 months has expired, cannot be accepted. It is apparent that after the deletion of the word 'established' w.e.f. 01.04.1989 in Section 36[1][vii] of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the writing of debt as irrrecoverable is 2 sufficient. The Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court reported at [2010] 323 ITR 397 [SC] (T.R.F. Ltd. .vrs. Commissioner of Income Tax), has settled this controversy. Shri Parchure, learned Counsel has tried to contend that the debt has not been written of in previous year. We are not in a position to accept even this position. The assessment order on which he is placing reliance has also correctly evaluated this position. Only reason given therein, is the assessee has not waited for sufficient time for recovery of debt. We therefore, find no substantial question of law arising in this appeal for consideration. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd