CIT v. South Indian Bank

233 CTR 214High Court#23818 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,487 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2021.

Judgments citing CIT v. South Indian Bank

DCIT, Circle- 2, Meerut vs. Sarva Up Gramin Bank, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3223/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)
Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 92C

…adjudicated by the ITAT in ITA No. 1937/Del/2016 in assessee’s own case wherein the deduction was allowed taking into consideration, the CBDT Circular No. 421 dated 12.06.1985, UCO Bank Ltd. 237 ITR 889 (SC), Catholic Syrian Bank 88 ITD 185, South Indian Bank 233 CTR 214. Since, the factual matter remains unchanged, in the absence of any other judgment contrary to the facts available on record, the addition made by the revenue is hereby ordered to be deleted. Page 6 of 12 ITA No.-3223/Del/2018. Sarva UP Gramin Bank. 6. For the sake of brevity, the operative portion of the order of the ITAT in the case of the ass…

DCIT, Meerut vs. M/S Sarva Up Gramin Bank, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2096/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2096/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Sarva Up Gramin Bank, Tax, Circle-2, C-39/5, Jagriti Vihar, Meerut Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacas9891G Assessee By : Sh. Vivek Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.01.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Vivek Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…adjudicated by the ITAT in ITA No. 1937/Del/2016 in assessee’s own case wherein the deduction was allowed taking into consideration, the CBDT Circular No. 421 dated 12.06.1985, UCO Bank Ltd. 237 ITR 889 (SC), Catholic Syrian Bank 88 ITD 185, South Indian Bank 233 CTR 214. Since, the factual matter remains unchanged, in the absence of any other judgment contrary to the facts available on record, the addition made by the revenue is hereby ordered to be deleted. 6. For the sake of brevity, the operative portion of the order of the ITAT in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is reproduced as und…

ACIT, Meerut vs. M/S. Sarva Up Gramin Bank, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1937/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Vivek Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(viia)

…as s. 36(1)(viia) was confined to rural advances, a claim for bad debts of urban advances was not subject to the limitation of the Proviso to s. 36(1)(vii). However, the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court took a contrary view in CIT vs. South Indian Bank 233 CTR 214 (Ker) (FB) and held that a bank was entitled to claim deduction of bad debts u/s 36(1)(vii) only to extent it exceeded the provision allowed as deduction under s. 36(1) (viia). On appeal to the Supreme Court, HELD reversing the Full Bench of the High Court: Per Court: (i) The clear legislative intent of s. 36(1)(vii) & 36(1)(viia) together…

CIT v. South Indian Bank (233 CTR 214) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax