THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/158/2015HC KeralaKLHC01025559201518 March 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal had to fail as the questions of law framed by the Revenue were covered against them by previous Division Bench judgments of the same court. Specifically, question 1 was covered by ITA No.84/2013 and connected cases. Questions 2 and 3 were covered by the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. [(2011) 339 ITR 606 (Ker)], which was also followed in ITA No.799/2009. Therefore, the questions of law were answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeal was consequently dismissed. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichur) filed an appeal before the High Court of Kerala against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, dated 24.12.2014, in ITA No.181/Coch/2014. The appeal was admitted on two questions of law, as the first question was already covered against the Revenue. The assessee is M/s. South Indian Bank Ltd. The dispute pertains to assessment years not explicitly stated in the judgment. The procedural history involves the Revenue filing an appeal against the Tribunal's order, which was admitted on specific grounds.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide three questions of law framed by the Revenue. 1. Whether the deletion of an addition on account of disallowance of Non-Performing Asset (NPA) investment considered bad and irrecoverable was in accordance with law? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in interfering with the Assessing Officer's order regarding the addition on account of depreciation claimed on Held-to-Maturity (HTM) category of investments? 3. Whether the Tribunal's order on the agitated issue was against the Supreme Court decision in United Commercial Bank (240 ITR 355) and CBDT Circular No. 665 dated 05.10.1993? The Revenue contended that the Tribunal's order was not in accordance with law, citing specific Supreme Court and CBDT pronouncements. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the assessee, but implies their position was in line with the Tribunal's decision. The High Court admitted the appeal only on questions 2 and 3.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 10 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN

DATED 29.09.2008. ANNEXURE-B:OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 04- 12-2013. ANNEXURE C:OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 24.12.2014. ANNEXURE D:OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.665 DATED 05.10.1993. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES NILPS TO JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →