What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and that the issue of timing difference in interest recognition needed verification. If the income was recognized in a subsequent year, no addition should be made to avoid double taxation.

The assessee's appeal concerned an addition made by the Assessing Officer on the difference between bank-credited interest and interest recognized by the assessee. The assessee claimed the difference was due to accrual vs. receipt basis of income recognition.

What were the issues?

Whether the difference in interest recognition due to accrual vs. receipt basis constitutes taxable income in the current year, and if the ex-parte order violated principles of natural justice.

Meena Vijay Joshi vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy

Assessment Year: 2009-10 Meena Vijay Joshi………………………….…..............................…..……………….…...……..…….............Appellant Flat No. 3-D 3rd Floor “Shiva Heights” 171A, Ramesh Dutta Street Kolkata – 700 006 [PAN : ACRPJ 6009 M] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-44(2), Kolkata……..………………………………..………...…...........Respondent Appearances by: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT Sr. D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : March 28th , 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : March 29th, 2019 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :- This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 13, Kolkata, (ld. CIT(A)) passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (the ‘Act’), dt. 28/04/2015, for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

After hearing rival contentions I find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex- parte order. The issue that arises in this appeal is the dispute on the addition made by the Assessing Officer of the difference between the interest credited by the bank to the bank account of the assessee and the interest recognised by the assessee in its books of account. The case of the assessee is that, it recognised interest income on receipt basis and whereas the bank credits the interest on accrual basis and deducts tax therefrom. The difference was explained as one of timing of recognition of income. 2.1. In my view, this issue has to be verified. If the assessee has recognised the income in question in the subsequent Assessment Year, in my view no addition can be made on account of this difference as it would be a double addition.

Assessment Year: 2009-10 Meena Vijay Joshi 3. In view of the above discussion and in view of the violation of principles of natural justice, I set aside the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, for fresh adjudication, in accordance with law. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 29th day of December, 2018.

MEENA VIJAY JOSHI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 44(2), KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments