CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd.

330 ITR 440High Court2011#830 most cited

What is CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. authority for?

Interest income is taxable under the mercantile system of accounting even if it is not actually recovered, provided there is a right to receive it. The decision also touches upon the treatment of bad debts and provisions for doubtful debts under Section 36(1)(viia).

125

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd · section 145 · mercantile system of accounting · right to receive · section 36(1)(viia) · bad debts · interest income · real income theory · section 43D

Also reported as

196 Taxmann 169238 CTR 142

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 1961Section 115JBSection 43DSection 145Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

Issues it is cited on

section 43dreal income theorysection 36(1)(viia)right to receivesection 45mercantile system of accountingsection 36(1)(vii)section 36(1)(iii)section 41section 43section 30section 36(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd.

Inocme Tax Officer Ward -2, Bhandara vs. The Bhandrara Urban Co-Operative Bank Limited, Bhandara

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 158/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 2Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 56

…echnologies Ltd. v/s JCIT, [2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC); v) Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v/s CIT, [1977] 225 ITR 746 (SC); vi) Mercantile Bank Ltd. v/.s CIT, Appeal (Civil) no.310 of 2001, judgment dated 01/05/2006 (SC); vii) CIT v/s Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 440 (HC-Del.); and viii) UCO Bank v/s CIT, judgment dated 13/05/1999. 7. We have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that this issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, in the case of Arvind The…

Commissioner of Income Ta, Kolkata - II vs. M/S. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corpn. L

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA/331/2008HC Calcutta01 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 1St May 2024. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate … For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Smt. Smita Das De, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Ananda Sen, Learned Counsel For The Respondent Assessee. 2.

Section 43BSection 43D

…d substantial question of law No.1 in ITA/331/2008 10. This substantial question of law regarding alleged interest on non- performing asses is covered by a judgment of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. & Another [2011] 330 ITR 440 (Delhi), which was affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. [2019] 410 ITR 244 (SC). The relevant portion of the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. (supra) is reproduced below:- “In this scenario, we have to examine the strength in the submission of learned coun…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-2, Kolkata vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corp. Ltd

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA/1/2018HC Calcutta01 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 1St May 2024. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate … For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Smt. Smita Das De, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Ananda Sen, Learned Counsel For The Respondent Assessee. 2.

Section 43BSection 43D

…d substantial question of law No.1 in ITA/331/2008 10. This substantial question of law regarding alleged interest on non- performing asses is covered by a judgment of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. & Another [2011] 330 ITR 440 (Delhi), which was affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. [2019] 410 ITR 244 (SC). The relevant portion of the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. (supra) is reproduced below:- “In this scenario, we have to examine the strength in the submission of learned coun…

Asst CIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4564/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ties also to be reckoned as income on realisation basis and the same has regularly been recognised in the books of account accordingly. The case law cited by the learned Counsel for the assessee before us in the case of CIT vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 440 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court had to consider a case where the assessee, being a NBFC, treated the inter corporate deposits as an NPA, in terms of the directions of the RBI and, hence, did not recognise interest income in respect of the same. The Delhi High Court has recognised the real income theory and this was approved by the Supreme Court in…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3645/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ties also to be reckoned as income on realisation basis and the same has regularly been recognised in the books of account accordingly. The case law cited by the learned Counsel for the assessee before us in the case of CIT vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 440 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court had to consider a case where the assessee, being a NBFC, treated the inter corporate deposits as an NPA, in terms of the directions of the RBI and, hence, did not recognise interest income in respect of the same. The Delhi High Court has recognised the real income theory and this was approved by the Supreme Court in…

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Idbi Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2937/MUM/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit- 3(4) V. M/S. Idbi Bank Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1 Central Processing Unit (Tds) World Trade Center, Cuffe Parade Plot No. 82/83, Elemach Bldg Mumbai- 400005 Road No. 7, Street No. 15 Midc, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aabci8842G (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Idbi Bank Ltd V. Acit/Dcit-Ltu 22Nd Floor, Idbi Tower 29Th Floor, Centre No. 1 Wtc Complex, Cuffe Parade World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai- 400005 Mumbai- 400005 Pan: Aabci8842G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 18

…count becoming NPA is not disputed by the revenue, the recognition of income is to be done only on receipt basis which is in consonance with the real income theory. In these circumstances and respectfully following the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 330 ITR 440 and various other decisions refered to supra, we hold that the interest income on NPA accounts should not be assessed on mercantile basis and the same is to be taxed only.” We have also perused the provision of Sect. 43D of the Act which are reproduced as under: “43D. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other pro vision of t…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 3865/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…count becoming NPA is not disputed by the revenue, the recognition of income is to be done only on receipt basis which is in consonance with the real income theory. In these circumstances and respectfully following the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 330 ITR 440 and various other decisions refered to supra, we hold that the interest income on NPA accounts should not be assessed on mercantile basis and the same is to be taxed only on receipt basis. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” We have also perused the provision of Sect. 43D of the Act which are reproduced as under: “43D.…

ACIT-2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 3863/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…count becoming NPA is not disputed by the revenue, the recognition of income is to be done only on receipt basis which is in consonance with the real income theory. In these circumstances and respectfully following the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 330 ITR 440 and various other decisions refered to supra, we hold that the interest income on NPA accounts should not be assessed on mercantile basis and the same is to be taxed only on receipt basis. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” We have also perused the provision of Sect. 43D of the Act which are reproduced as under: “43D.…

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle 2 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 3269/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…count becoming NPA is not disputed by the revenue, the recognition of income is to be done only on receipt basis which is in consonance with the real income theory. In these circumstances and respectfully following the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 330 ITR 440 and various other decisions refered to supra, we hold that the interest income on NPA accounts should not be assessed on mercantile basis and the same is to be taxed only on receipt basis. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” We have also perused the provision of Sect. 43D of the Act which are reproduced as under: “43D.…

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle 2 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 3268/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…count becoming NPA is not disputed by the revenue, the recognition of income is to be done only on receipt basis which is in consonance with the real income theory. In these circumstances and respectfully following the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 330 ITR 440 and various other decisions refered to supra, we hold that the interest income on NPA accounts should not be assessed on mercantile basis and the same is to be taxed only on receipt basis. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” We have also perused the provision of Sect. 43D of the Act which are reproduced as under: “43D.…

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle 2 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is dismissed

ITA 3267/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…count becoming NPA is not disputed by the revenue, the recognition of income is to be done only on receipt basis which is in consonance with the real income theory. In these circumstances and respectfully following the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 330 ITR 440 and various other decisions refered to supra, we hold that the interest income on NPA accounts should not be assessed on mercantile basis and the same is to be taxed only on receipt basis. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.” We have also perused the provision of Sect. 43D of the Act which are reproduced as under: “43D.…

Global Consultants & Designers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 11(4), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1424/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.1424/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…) Ltd. 124 ITR 619 (P&H) [SLP filed by the revenue has been dismissed vide SLP (Civil) No. 8158 of 1981 [144 ITR (St.) 50]. Re: Interest on ICDs which had had become NPA could not be said to have been accrued to the assessee 5. CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. 330 ITR 440 (Del) Affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 410 ITR 244 (SC) 6. CIT v. Brahmaputra Capital & Financial Services Ltd.: ITA 107/2012 (Del. HC) Re:Commercial or business expediency of incurring any expenditure is to be seen from the assessee’s point of view and the Revenue cannot justifiably put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman 9. SA B…

Icici Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1112/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ld Cit(A). Hence Both The Parties Have Filed These Appeals.

Section 43D

…count becoming NPA is not disputed by the revenue, the recognition of income is to be done only on receipt basis which is in consonance with the real income theory. In these circumstances and respectfully following the decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 330 ITR 440 and various other decisions refered to supra, we hold that the interest income on NPA accounts should not be assessed on mercantile basis and the same is to be taxed only on receipt basis. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed." We have also perused the provision of Sect. 43D of the Act which are reproduced as under: "43D.…

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 539/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…in the case of Tax Recovery Officer vs. Custodian Appointed Under the Special Court, reported in the case of 211 CTR 369 (SC) = (2007-TIOL-148-SC-IT) and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vasist Chay Vyapar Ltd., reported in 238 CTR 142 (Delhi) = (2010-TIOL- M/s. Diamonds ‘R' US 781-HC-DEL-IT) were also taken into consideration and thereafter it was concluded that in view of the Instruction No.1 of 2006, dated 24.03.2006 as modified by Instruction No.4 of 2006, dated 24.05.2006 issued by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India and the definition of service given…

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 538/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…in the case of Tax Recovery Officer vs. Custodian Appointed Under the Special Court, reported in the case of 211 CTR 369 (SC) = (2007-TIOL-148-SC-IT) and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vasist Chay Vyapar Ltd., reported in 238 CTR 142 (Delhi) = (2010-TIOL- M/s. Diamonds ‘R' US 781-HC-DEL-IT) were also taken into consideration and thereafter it was concluded that in view of the Instruction No.1 of 2006, dated 24.03.2006 as modified by Instruction No.4 of 2006, dated 24.05.2006 issued by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India and the definition of service given…

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 537/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…in the case of Tax Recovery Officer vs. Custodian Appointed Under the Special Court, reported in the case of 211 CTR 369 (SC) = (2007-TIOL-148-SC-IT) and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vasist Chay Vyapar Ltd., reported in 238 CTR 142 (Delhi) = (2010-TIOL- M/s. Diamonds ‘R' US 781-HC-DEL-IT) were also taken into consideration and thereafter it was concluded that in view of the Instruction No.1 of 2006, dated 24.03.2006 as modified by Instruction No.4 of 2006, dated 24.05.2006 issued by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India and the definition of service given…

Diamonds 'R' Us, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 536/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…in the case of Tax Recovery Officer vs. Custodian Appointed Under the Special Court, reported in the case of 211 CTR 369 (SC) = (2007-TIOL-148-SC-IT) and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vasist Chay Vyapar Ltd., reported in 238 CTR 142 (Delhi) = (2010-TIOL- M/s. Diamonds ‘R' US 781-HC-DEL-IT) were also taken into consideration and thereafter it was concluded that in view of the Instruction No.1 of 2006, dated 24.03.2006 as modified by Instruction No.4 of 2006, dated 24.05.2006 issued by the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India and the definition of service given…

ACIT-2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while for the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3864/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalicici Bank Limited Vs. The Acit, Circle 2(3)(2) Icici Bank Towers Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Bandra Kurla Complex Floor, Room No. 552/556 Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaci1195H Appellant .. Respondent The Acit, Circle 2(3)(2) Vs. Icici Bank Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Icici Bank Towers Floor, Room No. 552 Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai – 400 020 Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaci1195H Respondent .. Appellant

For Appellant: Aarti VisanjiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 43D

…aving regard to the guidelines issued by the RBI would warrant necessarily to follow the guidelines, superseding the prescribed rules in IT Rules, 1962 is therefore, clearly flawed. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vashisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. 330 ITR 440 have clearly mentioned the observation of Hon'ble Apex Court that in so far as the permissible deductions or exclusions under the Acts are concerned, the same are admissible only if such ITA Nos. 3215 & 3864/Mum/2019 5 ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. The ACIT-2(3)(2) deductions/exclusions satisfy the relevant conditions stipulated there for under the Act. F…

Icici Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. The Asst. CIT Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while for the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3215/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalicici Bank Limited Vs. The Acit, Circle 2(3)(2) Icici Bank Towers Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Bandra Kurla Complex Floor, Room No. 552/556 Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaci1195H Appellant .. Respondent The Acit, Circle 2(3)(2) Vs. Icici Bank Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Icici Bank Towers Floor, Room No. 552 Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai – 400 020 Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaci1195H Respondent .. Appellant

For Appellant: Aarti VisanjiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 43D

…aving regard to the guidelines issued by the RBI would warrant necessarily to follow the guidelines, superseding the prescribed rules in IT Rules, 1962 is therefore, clearly flawed. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vashisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. 330 ITR 440 have clearly mentioned the observation of Hon'ble Apex Court that in so far as the permissible deductions or exclusions under the Acts are concerned, the same are admissible only if such ITA Nos. 3215 & 3864/Mum/2019 5 ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. The ACIT-2(3)(2) deductions/exclusions satisfy the relevant conditions stipulated there for under the Act. F…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ratnagiri Circle, Ratnagiri vs. The Ratnagiri District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Ratnagiri

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2465/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2465/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Ratnagiri Circle, Ratnagiri बनधम / V/S. The Ratnagiri District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Sahakar Bhavan Jawahar Path, Ratnagiri ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pan : Aaaar7920B Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 119Section 143(3)Section 43DSection 45Q

…ogies Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbtore reported in 2010 (2) SCC 548, Mercantile Bank Ltd, Bombay Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, 4 The Ratnagiri District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (2006) 5 SCC 221 and Vasisth Chay Vyapar Limited 330 ITR 440 (Delhi) followed). It is evident from the above that the interest on sticky loans, where principal itself is doubtful of recovery cannot be assessed as income. In addition to this, it is seen that the decision of the Hon‟ble ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Usmanabad Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd in ITA No.795/PN/11 squarely covers the issue in favor of…