9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03.2013 passed by the Ld. A.O. and confirmed by the Ld. CIT (A), being beyond the jurisdiction of the Ld. A.O., is bad in law and is needs to be quashed. 2. That without prejudice to the ground No.1 above and on the facts and circumstances of the case and provision of the law, the Ld AO as well as Ld. CIT (A) erred in not allowing the deduction u/s 36(1 )(viia) to the extent of Rs. 68,91,000/- by not fully accepting the provision for bad & doubtful debts made by the bank for the purpose of deduction u/s 36(1 )(viia) of IT Act, 1961. 3. That the appellants request be allowed to add, modify and delete any other ground (s) of appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a Regional Rural Bank (RRB) established un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge advances made by the rural branches of such bank computed in the prescribed manner. The Rule 6ABA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 has provided the manner of computing the aggregate average advances as under: "[Computation of aggregate average advances for the purposes of clause (viia) of sub-section (1) of section 36. 6ABA. For the purposes of clause (viia) of sub-section (1) of section 36, the aggregate average advances made by the rural branches of a scheduled bank shall be computed in the following manner, namely :- (a) the amounts of advances made by each rural branch as outstanding at the end of the last day of each month comprised in the previous year shall be aggregated separately ; (b) the sum so arrived at in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pute in the case of the assessee itself for assessment year 2011-12 has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal. We find that the Tribunal in ITA No. 1561/Del/2015, in the case of the assessee has decided the issue in dispute following the decision of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT versus The Little Kancheepuram cooperative Urban bank limited in ITA No. 23 & 24/Mds/2013 decided on 21/03/2013 and decision of the Amritsar bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs M/s Punjab Gramin bank in ITA No. 583 and 584 (Asr)/2015, observing as under: "7. In view of this settled legal position, we are of the considered opinion that deduction of the provision under section 36(l)(viia) is neither limited to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
