2019 (10) TMI 1068 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of deposits with the Madhavpura Mercantile Co. Op. Bank Ltd . - HELD THAT - This is a settled principle of law that once it is established the appellant is a scheduled bank in terms of the notification of the RBI and interest accrued on NPA and has been classified by the RBI the benefit of section 43B ought to have been applicable to the appellant and the same cannot be added under section 145 of the act as has been rightly considered by the Learned CIT(A) without any ambiguity so far as to warrant interference. Hence we confirm the order of the Learned CIT(A). Thus the order is in favour of the assessee against the Revenue. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT - The issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and thus we find no ambiguity in the order passed by the Learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the Learned AO u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D. Hence this ground of appeal preferred by the Revenue is dismissed. Addition amortization of premium on Govt. Securities - revenue or capital expenditure - HELD THAT - It appears that the Hon ble Court has taken care of that the order passed by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Rajkot-2 vs. Rajkot Dist. Co-op. Bank Ltd. 2014 (3) TMI 110 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT where it was held that the CBDT instruction providing for amortization of premium paid on securities when the same were acquired at the rate higher than the face value such amortization would have to be for the remaining period of maturity.

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of disallowance of deposits with Madhavpura Mercantile Co-op. Bank Ltd.
2. Deletion of accrued interest on Non-Performing Assets (NPA) under section 43D.
3. Deletion of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D.
4. Deletion of addition on account of amortization of premium on Government securities.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Disallowance of Deposits with Madhavpura Mercantile Co-op. Bank Ltd.
The issue revolves around the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) of ?23,88,83,704/- on account of fixed deposit write-off with Madhavpura Mercantile Co-op. Bank Ltd. The AO disallowed the claim citing lack of corroborative evidence and the fact that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) was in favor of the revival of the bank. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] observed that the RBI had canceled the bank's license due to its precarious financial position, and the bank was not in a position to pay its depositors. The CIT(A) concluded that the assessee had justified the write-off, and thus, the addition was deleted. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming that the deletion was justified based on the evidence provided.

2. Deletion of Accrued Interest on Non-Performing Assets (NPA) under Section 43D
The AO added ?79,57,37,478/- as accrued interest on NPAs, arguing that the assessee follows the mercantile system of accounting. The assessee contended that as per section 43D and RBI guidelines, interest on NPAs should be recognized only when received. The CIT(A) agreed with the assessee, noting that the bank qualifies as a "scheduled bank" and is entitled to the benefits of section 43D. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, reiterating that the specific provisions of section 43D take precedence over the general provisions of section 145 of the Act.

3. Deletion of Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D
The AO disallowed ?53,68,445/- under section 14A read with Rule 8D, arguing that the assessee had not disallowed any expenditure incurred towards earning exempt income. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, stating that the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds to cover the investments generating exempt income. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the issue was already decided in favor of the assessee in the previous assessment year (A.Y. 2012-13) and that the investments were made out of interest-free funds.

4. Deletion of Addition on Account of Amortization of Premium on Government Securities
The AO disallowed the amortization of premium on government securities amounting to ?2,74,57,365/-, considering it a capital expenditure. The CIT(A) allowed the claim, relying on the RBI guidelines and the CBDT instruction No. 17 of 2008, which permit the amortization of premium on securities held under the "Held to Maturity" (HTM) category. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, referencing the Gujarat High Court's ruling in the case of CIT, Rajkot-II vs. Rajkot Dist. Co-op. Bank Ltd., which supports the amortization of premium on government securities.

Conclusion:
The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions on all issues, confirming the deletion of additions made by the AO. The appeals filed by both the assessee and the revenue were dismissed.

← Previous Next →