Writing off debt is purely commercial nature not required judicial intervention

Last updated: 06 October 2022
Quick Summary
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) upheld a lower tribunal's decision, stating that a company's decision to write off bad debts is a purely commercial matter and does not warrant judicial intervention. The tribunal also found that changes to bank account operating mandates, when passed by a majority of directors and not proven to be a 'colourable exercise', are within the Board's domain and not indicative of oppression or mismanagement.

Court :
NCLAT

Brief :
Whether the decision of the Board of Directors to write off the bad debt and operation of bank Account warrants judicial interference in respect of Oppression and Mismanagement of Companies?

Citation :
Company Appeal (AT) No.299 of 2019

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Community
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements Access
  • Profile Visitors
  • Link Social Profiles
  • Featured Job Posts
  • Pro Badge
  • Expert GST Guidance
  • Unlimited Forum Replies
  • Download Content in PDF
1 Year PLAN
1999
(Excl. of GST ₹359)

BEST VALUE
2 Years PLAN
3499
(Excl. of GST ₹629)

3 Months PLAN
999
(Excl. of GST ₹179)

View all CCI PRO benefits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

 
Comments


Recent Judgments :

  1. CESTAT: Rajasthan Sales Tax Subsidy under RIPS 2010 Not includible in Excise Assessable Value
  2. CESTAT: Late Payment Charges in the Nature of Interest Not Taxable as Declared Service
  3. CESTAT: Educational Services Exempt Under Section 66D; Extended Period Cannot Be Invoked Without Wilful Suppression
  4. CESTAT: No Service Tax on Royalty under RCM if Mining Lease Was Executed Before 1 April 2016
  5. No pre-deposit required for filing appeal before the GSTAT against penalty-only orders where proceedings commenced prior to October 01 2025
  6. Refund cannot be withheld under Section 54(11) of the CGST Act merely because the Revenue contemplates filing an appeal
  7. Scope of Rectification under Section 161 of the CGST Act is Confined to Errors Apparent on the Face of Record
  8. Appellate Authority has no power to condone delay in filing appeal beyond the outer limit prescribed under Section 107(4) of the CGST Act
  9. CESTAT New Delhi: Sub-Contractor Separately Liable for Service Tax Regardless of Main Contractor's Discharge
  10. Cenvat Credit Cannot Be Denied Merely on Third-Party Statements Without Corroborative Evidence

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member Joyashish MaitraJoyashish MaitraPro Member Binod SinghBinod SinghPro Member bhagat ram goyalbhagat ram goyalPro Member Sivashankary SivaramakrishnanSivashankary SivaramakrishnanPro Member Chnmaya parhiChnmaya parhi
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category




Latest Job Openings

View all
Company
16 September 2026
Internal Audit - Team Lead

Consulting & Beyond

Chennai

CA

View Details
Company
Featured 12 September 2026
Assistant Manager - Finance & Compliance

Naveen Fintech Pvt Ltd

Kolkata

CA Inter

View Details
Company
28 August 2026
Assistant Manager

NRS AND ASSOCIATES

Kozhikode

CA Inter

View Details
Company
28 August 2026
Audit Manager

K A R M & CO

Mumbai

CMA

View Details
Company
04 September 2026
CA inter Or ca finalist

A Jaiswal and company

Lucknow

CA Final

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 07 September 2026
Article/ Paid Assistant

Murali and Sumeet Chartered Accountant

Bengaluru

CA Foundation

View Details
Company
Featured 21 September 2026
Consultant - Reporting

Finrep Advisors LLP

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
25 August 2026
Senior Accountant

MG Associates

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details