THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. THE BELAGAVI DISTRICT CO-OP.,
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the appeal by the Revenue. It was noted that a Division Bench of the same court had already decided the issue in favour of the assessee in a similar case.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that deleted additions on account of accrued interest on NPAs. The Revenue argued that Section 43D of the IT Act was ignored.
What were the issues?
Whether accrued interest on NPAs should be taxed, considering Section 43D of the Income Tax Act, despite a High Court ruling on the matter.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- CIT v. Canfin Homes Ltd.62 citing13 Taxmann.com 43 · 2012 · HC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR ITA No.100027 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELGAVI. 2 THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2, BELAGAVI,
… APPELLANTS (BY SRI Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV.) AND THE BELGAUM DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD., OLD P.B.ROAD, NEAR CENTRAL BUS STAND, BELAGAVI, PAN AAAAB0839M. …. RESPONDENT. (BY SRI ASHOK KULKARNI & SRI H.R.KAMBIYAVAR, ADVs.)
2 THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI, IN ITA NO.324/PNJ/2013, DTD:14.11.2014 AND ETC. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT In this appeal by Revenue, following substantial question of law is raised; 1. Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on fact in deleting the additions on account of accrued interest on loans which are classified as “Non- performing Assets” relying on the Karnataka High Court decision in Canfin Homes Ltd., (2011) 5 Tax Corp (DT) 49593, ignoring the provisions of section 43D of the I.T.Act, 1961 amended w.e.f. 01.04.2000?” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Assessee submits that in ITA No.471/2013 disposed
3 of on 30.06.2014, a Division Bench of this Court has answered the substantial questions of law in favour of the Assessee by following the earlier judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bangalore /vs./ Canfin Homes Limited ((2011) 201 TAXMAN 273/13 taxmann.Com 43(Karnataka). 3. Learned counsel for the assessee and revenue agree that the issue involved in this appeal and ITA No.471/2013 are one and the same. Consequently, this appeal by the revenue is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE. Sd/- JUDGE. KLY/
More judgments on Section 43D
- DCIT, Jabalpur vs Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, SeoniITA 161/JAB/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed22 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-Parwanoo, Parwanoo vs Jogindra Central Co-Operative Bank Limited…ITA 123/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed14 Jul 2026AY 2014-15
- Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo vs Jogindra Central Co-Operative Bank Limited…ITA 119/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: Disposed14 Jul 2026AY 2013-14
- Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo vs Jogindera Central Co-Operative Bank…ITA 118/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed14 Jul 2026AY 2012-13
- M/S. Sumathi Bai Industrial Finance India… vs DCIT, CC-3(1), ChennaiITA 3279/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed26 May 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026