Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 203
ITA-390-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.12.2025 STATE BANK OF PATIALA ...Petitioner Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA …Respondent
Sr. No. Case No. Petitioner(s) Respondent(s) 2. ITA-391-2011 (O&M) State Bank of Patiala, Patiala, Punjab The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala 3. ITA-392-2011 (O&M) State Bank of Patiala, Patiala, Punjab The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala 4. ITA-393-2011 (O&M) State Bank of Patiala, Patiala, Punjab The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala 5. ITA-394-2011 (O&M) State Bank of Patiala, Patiala, Punjab The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala 6. ITA-432-2015 (O&M) The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala State Bank of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala 7. ITA-439-2015 (O&M) The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala State Bank of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala 8. ITA-450-2015 (O&M) The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala State Bank of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala 9. ITA-462-2015 (O&M) The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala State Bank of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL
Present:- Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gurdeep Singh, Advocate Mr. Sushrut Singla, Advocate and Mr. Iman Singla, Advocate for appellant-State Bank of Patiala
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Advocate with
Mr. Rana Gurtej Singh, Advocate and
Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate
for respondent-Income Tax Department
*** DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.12.04 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
ITA-390-2011 (O&M) and connected cases
-2-
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. 2.
Three issues are involved in these appeals. First issue relates to disallowance under Section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act’) on the securities held in stock. This issue stands settled by this Court in “Principle CIT Vs. State of Patiala”, (2017) 391 ITR 218 (P&H). The judgment of this Court stands affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax”, 2018 SCC Online SC 250. 3.
The second issue relates to applicability of Section 41(4) read with 36(1)(vii) of 1961 Act with respect to recovery of bad debts which were written off in the earlier assessment years, however, deduction was not claimed. The Tribunal for the subsequent assessment years remanded the matter back to Assessing Authority which agreed with the stand of the assessee. 4.
The Tribunal has declined to adjudicate four issues on the ground of absence of Committee on Disputes (for short ‘COD’) approval. Hon’ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 17.02.2011 passed in “Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. vs. UOI and Ors.”, (2011) 3 SCC 404, has dispensed with requirement of COD approval in case of dispute between Public Sector Undertaking and State. The Tribunal was supposed to adjudicate issues raised by appellant even without approval of COD. DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.12.04 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
ITA-390-2011 (O&M) and connected cases
-3-
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem with respect to aforestated factual and legal position and submit that matter may be remanded to Assessing Authority or Tribunal, as this Court deems fit, to pass fresh order in accordance with afore-stated legal/factual position. 6.
In the wake of statement of both sides, we find it appropriate to remand all the appeals to Tribunal because Tribunal has not adjudicated four issues on the ground of absence of COD approval. Accordingly, all the appeals are allowed by way of remand to Tribunal which would pass fresh order in accordance with law. The parties would be free to raise all the arguments with respect to aforesaid issues before the Tribunal. 7.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
JUDGE
(AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL)
JUDGE December 03, 2025 Deepak DPA
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable
Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2025.12.04 17:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document