THE COMMISSIONER vs. THE BILAGI PATTAN SAHAKARI BANK NIYAMITH
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, agreeing that the issue was identical to a prior case decided in favor of the assessee. The court followed its earlier judgment on the matter.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that deleted additions on accrued interest for NPAs. The assessee argued that a previous High Court decision in a similar case supported their position.
What were the issues?
Whether accrued interest on NPAs should be taxed, considering Section 43D and previous High Court rulings.
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.100090 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELGAUM. 2 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, BIJAPUR. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV.) AND THE BILAGI PATTAN SAHAKARI BANK NIYAMITH, MAIN RAOAD, NEAR BUS STAND, BILAGI, PAN:AADHB8430J …. RESPONDENT. 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, B-BENCH,
2 BANGALORE, IN ITA NO.1531/Bang/2013, DTD:13.02.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 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 of on 30.06.2014, a Division Bench of this Court has
3 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 →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026