THE ADDL.. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S KRISHNA GRAMEEN BANK

PDF · subscribers
ITA/6007/2012HC KarnatakaKAHC03005064201217 November 2021Bench: R.DEVDAS,RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the issue is covered by previous judgments, including the case of Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank. Therefore, the deduction for amortization of premium on government securities is allowable.

What were the facts?

The appeal concerns the deductibility of expenditure incurred on the amortization of premium paid for government securities. The Revenue appealed a decision that allowed this deduction.

What were the issues?

Whether expenditure on amortization of premium paid on purchase of government securities is deductible. Whether the issue is covered by Supreme Court and High Court judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. DEVDAS AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR I.T.A. No.6007/2012 BETWEEN: THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GULBARGA RANGE, GULBARGA-585102 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. AMEET KUMAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S KRISHNA GRAMEEN BANK HEAD OFFICE, KHUSNOOR ROAD, GULBARGA-585102 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.S.ANNAMALAI AND SRI M.LAVA, ADVOCATES)

THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 15.06.2012 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH-B, IN I.T.A.NO.224/BANG/2011, CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 23.12.2010 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HUBLI, IN I.T.A.NO.246/HBL/CIT(A)/09-10, AND TO GRANT ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE RELIEF. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, R.DEVDAS J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

The substantial question of law that arises for decision making in this appeal is whether the deduction towards the expenditure of amortization of the premium paid on purchase of government securities can be allowed, in view of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank reported in 187 ITR 541?

3 2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri A. Shankar, appearing for the respondent-Assessee submits that the issue stands covered by various decisions, including that of The Commissioner of Income Tax and another vs. Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank in I.T.A.No.100014/2014 dated 14.12.2015 (Kar.). A list of other decisions are also cited by the learned Senior Counsel. 3. Although learned counsel Sri. Ameet Kumar Deshpande, appearing for the appellant/revenue does not concede that the issue stands covered, nevertheless, he is not forthcoming with any other decision, which is rendered subsequent to the decision in the case of Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank (supra), which covers the issue or which has taken different view from that of said decision.

4 4. Consequently, we proceed to hold that the issue stands covered by the decision in the case of Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank (supra). 5. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed by answering the substantial question of law in favour of respondent/assessee and against the appellant/revenue. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE sdu

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →