JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LTU), BANGALORE vs. M/S CANARA BANK, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 843/BANG/2017Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 November 2017AY 2012-134 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the provisions of Section 115JB are not applicable to a banking company, following its own previous decisions. It also dismissed the ground related to depreciation on leased assets as consequential.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the assessment year 2011-13. The appeal raised grounds challenging the applicability of Section 115JB and depreciation on leased assets.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the applicability of Section 115JB to banking companies and the treatment of depreciation on leased assets.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115JB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, BENGALURU

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI LALIET KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri R.K.Jha, (CIT)
For Respondent: Ms. R.Lalith, Advocate
Hearing: 09/11/2017Pronounced: 17/11/2017

This is an appeal filed by the revenue directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-14, LTU, Bengaluru [CIT(A)], dated 30/01/2017 for the assessment year 201-13.

2.

The revenue raised the following grounds of appeal:

3. Ground Nos.1 and 4 are general in nature and do not require any adjudication. Ground No.2 challenges the finding of the CIT(A) that the provisions of section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short] are not applicable to a banking company. This issue is covered against the revenue by the ratio of the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the assessee’s own case in dated 15/09/2017 for the assessment year 2009-10 wherein, it has been held as under:

“13. Ground of appeal No.5 is on the applicability of the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. This issue had come up before the co- ordinate bench in the case of assessee for asst. year 2005-06 in dated 18/06/2012 wherein it was held as follows:

Page 3 of 4 In the light of this decision, we do not find any fallacy in the order of the CIT(A) CIT(A). Hence, we dismiss this ground of appeal.

4.

Ground No.3 is also covered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 2009-10 in dated 15/09/2017. The relevant paragraph is extracted below: “11. Ground of appeal No.3 relates to depreciation on leased assets to Kedia group of companies. This issue is only consequential in nature, as in the earlier years viz., 2008-09 and 2007-08, we allowed the claim vide order dated 13/07/2016 in Misc.Petn.Nos.42 & 43/Bang/2016 in ITA Nos.684/Bang/2012 & 813/Bang/2011. This ground of appeal is dismissed.”

Respectfully following the same, we dismiss ground No.3 since issue of depreciation on leased assets is only consequential in nature and also for reasons of parity, decision for earlier years requires to be followed. Ground No.3 is dismissed.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 115JB

All 5,494 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115JB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →