2018 (12) TMI 1944 - HC - Income Tax

Depreciation on valuation of investment portfolio - Whether Tribunal was correct in holding that depreciation on valuation of investment portfolio is allowable by treating the investments held by the assessee s bank as stock-in-trade once the RBI Master Circular read with CBDT Circular No.665 came into force and even when under the provisions of the IT Act depreciation on valuation of investment portfolio was not allowable? - HELD THAT - Substantial questions of law are covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2013 (7) TMI 656 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT wherein the very same questions of law was answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Hence, following the aforesaid judgment, the substantial questions of law is answered accordingly.The appeal stands disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Depreciation on valuation of investment portfolio - Allowability by treating investments as stock-in-trade.
2. Justification of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision on depreciation.

Analysis:
1. The first issue pertains to the correctness of the Tribunal's decision regarding the allowability of depreciation on the valuation of the investment portfolio by treating the investments held by the assessee's bank as stock-in-trade. The crux of the matter was whether the RBI Master Circular, in conjunction with CBDT Circular No.665, permitted such treatment, despite the absence of allowance for depreciation on the valuation of investment portfolio under the IT Act. The Tribunal's decision was challenged based on the contention that it was not in line with the provisions of the IT Act. However, both counsels referred to a previous judgment of the High Court in the case of KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, where similar questions of law were decided in favor of the assessee. Consequently, the High Court, following the precedent, upheld the allowability of depreciation on the valuation of the investment portfolio by treating the investments as stock-in-trade.

2. The second issue revolves around the justification of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision to dismiss the appeal by the revenue. The Tribunal's ruling allowing depreciation on the valuation of the investment portfolio by treating the investments as stock-in-trade was questioned for being allegedly perverse in nature, as it contradicted the provisions of the IT Act. However, the High Court, guided by the earlier judgment in the KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED case, found the Tribunal's decision to be in line with the legal principles established in the precedent. Consequently, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision and disposed of the appeal in favor of the assessee.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment in this case reaffirmed the allowability of depreciation on the valuation of the investment portfolio by treating the investments as stock-in-trade, as established in a previous ruling. The decision highlights the importance of legal precedents in interpreting and applying tax laws, ensuring consistency and predictability in judicial outcomes.