DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BARODA vs. M/S. PRAGATI SAHAKARI BANK LTD., BARODA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 766/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 November 2017AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable. This was due to the low tax effect, which was below the threshold prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 21/2015, and no exemption clauses were applicable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal raised issues regarding the assessee's accounting system and the applicability of Section 43D to a non-scheduled co-operative bank.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal given the low tax effect as per CBDT circulars. Whether Section 43D is applicable to a non-scheduled co-operative bank.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

ITA No. 766/Ahd/2015 DCIT vs. Pragati Sahakari Bank Ltd Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and S S Godara JM]

ITA No. 766/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year : 2011-12

The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax .......…………......Appellant Circle-1(2), Baroda Vs. M/s. Pragati Sahakari Bank Ltd .......................Respondent Alembic Colony, Alembic Road Baroda – 390 003 [PAN : AAAAP 0468 N] Appearances by: Prasoon Kabra for the appellant Bandish S. Sparkar for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 24.11.2017 Date of pronouncing the order : 24.11.2017 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, AM: 1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-5, Baroda dated 26.11.2014 for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2.

The grievances of the Assessing Officer are as follows:-

“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that an assessee is not allowed to follow hybrid system of accounting. 2. Whether the ld. CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition made on account of interest income on NPAs as the assessee is a non-scheduled co- operative bank and the provisions of section 43D is not applicable to the assessee?” 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submits that the appeal of the Revenue needs to be dismissed on account of low tax effect in view of the CBDT Circular No.21 of 2015 dated 10.12.2015. The learned Departmental Representative fairly admitted that the tax effect is less than the limit prescribed by the aforesaid CBDT Circular.

ITA No. 766/Ahd/2015 DCIT vs. Pragati Sahakari Bank Ltd Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 2 of 2 4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of applicable legal position.

5.

We find that prima-facie this appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 21/2015 in F.No.279/Misc. 142/2007-ITJ (Pt) dated 10th December 2015, vide which it has been provided that if the tax effect by virtue of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)’s order is below Rs. 10 lacs, then that order would not be challenged before the Tribunal in further appeal. The Board has provided exemptions at clause (8) of the Instructions wherein it has been provided that these instructions will not be applicable, if vires of any provisions has been quashed by impugned order or addition was made on some audit objections or the addition relates to undisclosed foreign assets/bank accounts, etc. We find that the present case does not fall within the exemption clause and the tax is less than Rs.10 lacs. Therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable and hence dismissed. [[[ 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed in limine. Pronounced in the open court today on the 24th of November, 2017.

Sd/- Sd/-

S S Godara Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 24th day of November, 2017 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad

1.

Date of dictation: ......covered matter….24.11.2017 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member: ... 24.11.2017........ 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: …24.11.2017... 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement:… 24.11.2017 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk : ... 29.11.2017... 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk : ……………………………. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: ……

More judgments on Section 43D

All 155 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43D →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →