9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 1082 - AT - Income TaxInterest received from bad and doubtful debts (NPA) on actual receipt basis as per RBI guidelines - assessee is following mercantile system of accounting - Held that - This case, nowhere it is disputed that on receipt basis the assessee is recognising the income that has been accepted by the AO in the past. Forfeited amount of dividend - whether not an income of the assessee u/s.28 - Held that - Provision for dividend is made out of profit which has already suffered tax. Only the provision is reversed as per bye-laws of the cooperative society. In our opinion, the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition and no interference is called for from our side
Issues Involved:
1. Taxability of interest on Non-Performing Assets (NPA) for a cooperative bank following the mercantile system of accounting. 2. Taxability of forfeited dividend credited to the General Reserve. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Taxability of Interest on Non-Performing Assets (NPA): The primary issue revolves around whether the interest received from bad and doubtful debts (NPA) should be offered on an actual receipt basis as per RBI guidelines, despite the assessee following a mercantile system of accounting. The Revenue challenged the decision of the CIT(A) which allowed the assessee to recognize interest on NPA on a receipt basis. The Tribunal noted that the assessee, a cooperative bank, consistently declared income on a receipt basis for interest on NPA accounts. The AO had added Rs. 1,19,77,000 to the assessee's income, arguing that interest should be accrued and taxed. However, the CIT(A) deleted this addition, and the Tribunal upheld this decision, referencing similar cases such as Osmanabad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. and other precedents where interest on NPA was not accrued for tax purposes. The Tribunal emphasized that Section 43D of the Income Tax Act, which allows interest on certain bad and doubtful debts to be taxed on a receipt basis, applies to non-scheduled banks as well. The Tribunal further cited the Supreme Court's decision in UCO Bank vs. CIT, which upheld that interest on sticky advances should be taxed only when actually received. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee's practice of recognizing interest on NPAs on a receipt basis was consistent with legal precedents and RBI guidelines, thus confirming the order of the CIT(A) and dismissing the Revenue's ground. 2. Taxability of Forfeited Dividend: The second issue pertains to whether the forfeited amount of dividend, credited to the General Reserve, constitutes income under Section 28 of the Income Tax Act. The AO had added Rs. 10,30,218 to the assessee's income, arguing that the forfeited dividend should be considered taxable income. The Tribunal referred to a similar case, ACIT vs. M/s. Sunderlal Swaji Urban Co-op Bank Ltd., where it was held that the forfeited dividend, initially provided from business profits that had already been taxed, should not be subjected to further tax under Section 41(1). The Tribunal noted that the provision for the dividend was reversed as per the cooperative society's bye-laws and had already suffered tax when initially declared. The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) correctly deleted the addition made by the AO, as the forfeited dividend did not constitute income liable to tax under Section 28. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's ground on this issue as well. Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on both grounds. It upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the interest on NPAs should be recognized on an actual receipt basis, consistent with RBI guidelines and legal precedents. Additionally, it affirmed that the forfeited dividend, already taxed when initially declared, should not be taxed again when credited to the General Reserve.
|
