Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs Bijapaur District Central ... on 14 March, 2018
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
"A" BENCH : BANGALORE
BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI. JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.2052/Bang/2017
Assessment year : 2008-09
The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. The Bijapur District Central
of Income Tax, Co-operative Bank Ltd.,
Circle -1, Solapur Road,
Vijayapur. Vijayapur.
PAN : AAAAB 0694 E
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Revenue by : Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I
Assessee by : Shri. Sandeep, CA
Date of hearing : 01.03.2018
Date of Pronouncement : 14.03.2018
ORDER
Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member
This appeal is preferred by the revenue against the order of CIT(A), interalia, on the following grounds:
(1) The ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions on account of accrued interest on loans which are classified as "Non-performing Assets" relying on the Karnataka High Court decision in Canfin Homes Ltd (2011) 5 Tax Corp (DT) 49593 and Bilagi Pattiha Sahakari Bank Niyamit in ITA No 100090 of 2015 Ignoring the provisions of section 43D of the I.T. Act, 1961?
(2) On the facts and in law the ld.CIT(A) erred in holding that income accrued to the assessee cannot be taken as income in the year ignoring the amended provisions of section 43D of the I.T. Act, 1961, which provides certain benefit to the certain class of assessees but does not provide such benefit to the assessee bank, the provisions of section 43D amended w.e.f. 1.4.2000 overruled the Court decisions/Circulars and more particularly when the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting.
ITA No. 2052Bang/2017 Page 2 of 3 (3) The Id. CIT(A) did not appreciate the fact that the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of The Bilagi Pattan Sahakari bank Niyarnit, Bilagi in ITA No. 100090 of 2015 and Canfin Homes has not been accepted by the Department and SLP has been filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which is pending.
2. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee invited our attention to the impugned issue with the submission that the impugned issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Canfin Homes Ltd (2011) 5 Tax Corp (DT) 49593 and Bilagi Pattiha Sahakari Bank Niyamit in ITA No 100090 of 2015. Since the CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court, no interference in the order of the CIT(A) is called for.
The learned DR on the other hand placed reliance upon the order of the AO with the submission that the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Canfin Homes Ltd and Bilagi Pattiha Sahakari Bank Niyamit (supra) were not accepted by the department as they have filed a SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
3. Having carefully examined the order of the lower authorities in the light of rival submissions, we find that CIT(A) has adjudicated the impugned issue following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court. Unless and until the operation of the order of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court is stayed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, it holds the field and all subordinate judicial authorities are supposed to follow the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court. Mere filing of SLP does not amount to stay of the operation of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that CIT(A) has rightly adjudicated the issue in the light of the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court and we find no infirmity therein. Accordingly, we confirm his order.
ITA No. 2052Bang/2017 Page 3 of 3
4. In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on 14th March, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/-
(JASON P BOAZ) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Bangalore.
Dated: 14th March, 2018.
/NS/*
Copy to:
1. Appellants 2. Respondent
3. CIT 4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file
By order
Sr. Private Secretary,
ITAT, Bangalore.