Commissioner of Income Tax v. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd.

379 ITR 24High Court2015#3965 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. authority for?

Interest income on non-performing assets (NPAs) not recognized as per RBI guidelines cannot be taxed, especially when specific provisions like Section 43D and Rule 6EA are considered.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. · 379 ITR 24 · Section 43D · Rule 6EA · RBI guidelines · NPA · interest income · taxation of interest

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 115JBSection 145Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 43B

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(ia)icdslive linksection 36(1)(iii)section 115jsection 40(a)section 40(a)(ia)disallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14arevenue expendituresection 115jbsection 145

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(4),MUMBAI, AAYKAR BHAVAN vs. IDBI BANK LTD, PARTH PLAZAMORBI

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5959/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.5900, 5958 & 5959/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2021-22, 2018-19 & 2013-14) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Idbi Bank Ltd., Income Tax -3(4), Apulki Cornermenon, Mumbai Piston Compound, Toap 416122, Kolhapur Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabci8842G (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) प्रत्याक्षेप सं../C.O. No.280/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 5959/Mum/2024) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Idbi Bank Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Apulki Cornermenon, Of Income Tax -3(4), Piston Compound, Mumbai Toap 416122, Kolhapur Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabci8842G (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT,DR
Section 250

…sed based on RBI guidelines cannot be taxed. Reference may be had to the decision of SC in the case of CIT v Vashist CO.No.28/Mum/2024 IDBI Bank Ltd. Chay Vyapar Limited 301 CTR 263 and the Bombay High Court in the case of Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Limited 379 ITR 24. This issue is covered in its favour by the Jurisdictional ITAT Mumbai in case of State Bank of India (ITA 3644 and 4563/Mum/2016), Mumbai ITAT in the case of ICICI Bank Ltd (ITA 3215/Mum/2019),State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (ITA 3033/Mum/2019) and ITAT Kolkata in case of Royal Bank of Scotland (ITA Nos. 36 & 1885/Kol/2017). The ld.CIT,DR vide h…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(4), MUMBAI vs. IDBI BANK LTD, PANCHANANTALA ROAD

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals of the\nRevenue and CO of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5958/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2018-19
Section 250

…Rule 6EA\ninterest not recognised based on RBI guidelines cannot be taxed.\nReference may be had to the decision of SC in the case of CIT v Vashist\nChay Vyapar Limited 301 CTR 263 and the Bombay High Court\nin the case of Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Limited 379 ITR 24.\nThis issue is covered in its favour by the Jurisdictional ITAT Mumbai in\ncase of State Bank of India (ITA 3644_and_4563/Mum/2016),\nMumbai ITAT in the case of ICICI Bank Ltd (ITA\n3215/Mum/2019),State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (ITA\n3033/Mum/2019) and ITAT Kolkata in case of Royal Bank of\nScotland (ITA Nos.36 & 1885/Kol/2017). The ld.CIT,DR v…

ACIT 3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. IDBI BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals of the Revenue and CO of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5900/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.5900, 5958 & 5959/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2021-22, 2018-19 & 2013-14) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Idbi Bank Ltd., Income Tax -3(4), Apulki Cornermenon, Mumbai Piston Compound, Toap 416122, Kolhapur Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabci8842G (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) प्रत्याक्षेप सं../C.O. No.280/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 5959/Mum/2024) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Idbi Bank Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Apulki Cornermenon, Of Income Tax -3(4), Piston Compound, Mumbai Toap 416122, Kolhapur Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabci8842G (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT,DR
Section 250

…sed based on RBI guidelines cannot be taxed. Reference may be had to the decision of SC in the case of CIT v Vashist CO.No.28/Mum/2024 IDBI Bank Ltd. Chay Vyapar Limited 301 CTR 263 and the Bombay High Court in the case of Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Limited 379 ITR 24. This issue is covered in its favour by the Jurisdictional ITAT Mumbai in case of State Bank of India (ITA 3644 and 4563/Mum/2016), Mumbai ITAT in the case of ICICI Bank Ltd (ITA 3215/Mum/2019),State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (ITA 3033/Mum/2019) and ITAT Kolkata in case of Royal Bank of Scotland (ITA Nos. 36 & 1885/Kol/2017). The ld.CIT,DR vide h…

IDBI BANK LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-LTU(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4596/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalidbi Bank Ltd. 22Nd Floor, Idbi Tower, Wtc Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400 005. Pan: Aabci8842G ..... Appellant Vs. Acit Ltu (2) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai ..... Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(2)Section 40

…I Bank Ltd. d. ITAT Pune in case of Bank of Maharashtra (ITA No.634/PUN/2017 and others.) (e) Decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Vashist CHAY Vyapar Limited 410 ITR 244 and the Bombay High Court in the case of Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Limited 379 ITR 24. 12. The operative portion of order of Coordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of State Bank of India in ITA No. 3644 & 4653/Mum/2016 is reproduced here under:- “76. Brief facts are that the assessee, based on criteria as per the RBI guidelines (i.e. 90- day overdue norm), has classified its advances as NPA. The interest income on such NPAs is recogn…

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

…9/Mds/2016) (vi) ITAT Pune in case of Bank of Maharashtra (ITA No.634/PUN/2017 and others.) (vii) Reliance is also placed on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Vashist CHAY Vyapar Limited 410 ITR 244 (viii) Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Limited 379 ITR 24. 32. Further, with regard to Ground No. 3.1 which is in respect of amount of unrealized interest taxed in earlier years not allowed, Ld. AR submitted that in A.Y. 2016-17 Assessing Officer taxed the unrealized interest on NPA, since according to him it did not satisfy the criteria laid down in Rule 6EA as the arrears was only between 90 to 180 day…

THE PANIPAT URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PANIPAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5040/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava(Through Video Conferencing) The Panipat Urban Co- Vs. Acit Operative Bank Ltd., Circle G. T. Road, Panipat, Panipat Haryana – 110 025 Pan No. Aaalt 0141 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Sonal, C.A. Revenue By Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. D.R.

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 43D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) The Panipat Urban Co- Vs. ACIT operative Bank Ltd., Circle G. T. Road, Panipat, Panipat Haryana – 110 025 PAN No. AAALT 0141 K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Ms. Sonal, C.A. Revenue by Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 11.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 23.11.2021 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.05.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 12,, PUNE vs. PUNE PEOPLES CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the Revenue’s ground is dismissed

ITA 269/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43D

…passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. The assessee challenged the order passed by the AO before the CIT(A). We note that the CIT(A) placing reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported in 379 ITR 24 (Bom) held interest accrued on NPAs is not chargeable to tax and directed the AO to delete the addition made. The appellant Revenue before us challenging the order of CIT(A) by raising grounds as discussed above. 4. Shri Deepak Garg, the DR opposed the order of CIT(A) and placed reliance on the order of AO in support of grounds raised therein. 5…

LATUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BNAK LTD,,LATUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -2,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 628/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.165 & 628/Pun/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Latur District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Ldcc Bank Building, 7Th Floor, Yashwantrao Chavan Road, Latur-413 512. Pan : Aaaal0225H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Aurangabad. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA Nos.165 & 628/PUN/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Latur District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. LDCC Bank Building, 7th Floor, Yashwantrao Chavan Road, Latur-413 512. PAN : AAAAL0225H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Aurangabad. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue by : Shri S.B. Prasad. सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30.09.2019 घोषणा की ता…

LATUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LIMITED,,LATUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-2,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 165/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.165 & 628/Pun/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Latur District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Ldcc Bank Building, 7Th Floor, Yashwantrao Chavan Road, Latur-413 512. Pan : Aaaal0225H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Aurangabad. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA Nos.165 & 628/PUN/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Latur District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. LDCC Bank Building, 7th Floor, Yashwantrao Chavan Road, Latur-413 512. PAN : AAAAL0225H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Aurangabad. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue by : Shri S.B. Prasad. सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30.09.2019 घोषणा की ता…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. JAI HIND CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 300/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri N. Ashok Babu
Section 14ASection 43D

…the first issue relating to interest on sticky loans raised in ground Nos. 1 to 3 of the appeal by the Revenue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported as 379 ITR 24 and in the decision of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Solapur District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. reported as 261 Taxman 476 (Bom). The ld. AR submitted that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has decided this issue in favour of assessee by following various decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court including the decision rendered in th…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 12,, PUNE vs. BHARATI SAHAKARI BANK LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 383/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Mahaveer JainFor Respondent: Ms. Shabana Parveen
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 43DSection 45QSection 5Section 56

…sessee and accordingly made its addition. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A) who after following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd., reported in (2015) 379 ITR 24 directed the AO to delete the addition made on account of interest made on NPAs. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is now before us. 5. Before us, Ld. D.R. supported the order of AO. Ld.A.R. on the other hand reiterated the submissions made before AO and Ld.CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on r…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S . PUNE MERCHANTS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 183/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: (Written submissions filed)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 43D

…accrual of income and as per the guidelines of RBI, the interest accrued on NPA accounts is not to be considered as income. It was further submitted that Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd., reported in (2015) 379 ITR 24 on identical facts has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. He thus supported the order of Ld.CIT(A). 9. We have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to addition on account of interest on NPA accounts. We find that Ld.CIT(A) by following the order of Pune Tribunal had he…

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 635/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. reported as 410 ITR 244 and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported as 379 ITR 24. The ld. AR further contended that identical issue had come up before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in assessment year 2010-11. The Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal following the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court has deleted the addition. 9.2 We find that identical ground of appeal was raised before the Tribunal by the assessee i…

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 634/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. reported as 410 ITR 244 and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported as 379 ITR 24. The ld. AR further contended that identical issue had come up before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in assessment year 2010-11. The Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal following the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court has deleted the addition. 9.2 We find that identical ground of appeal was raised before the Tribunal by the assessee i…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 581/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. reported as 410 ITR 244 and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported as 379 ITR 24. The ld. AR further contended that identical issue had come up before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in assessment year 2010-11. The Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal following the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court has deleted the addition. 9.2 We find that identical ground of appeal was raised before the Tribunal by the assessee i…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 579/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan with Mrs. Lalitha RFor Respondent: Mrs. Kesang Y. Sherpa

…ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. reported as 410 ITR 244 and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported as 379 ITR 24. The ld. AR further contended that identical issue had come up before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in assessment year 2010-11. The Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal following the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court has deleted the addition. 9.2 We find that identical ground of appeal was raised before the Tribunal by the assessee i…

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. THE KALUPUR COMMERCIAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and all Tax Appeals are dismissed

ITA 1864/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Soni, CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…'s appeal. The Tribunal relied on its earlier judgment in case of the assessee for earlier assessment years, in which, reliance was placed on the decision of Bombay High Court in case of CIT v. Deogiri Nagar Sahakari Bank Ltd. [2017] 79 taxmann.com 396/[2015] 379 ITR 24 (Bom). DCIT vs. The Kalupur Commercial Co-op Bank Ltd. Assessment Year 2014-15 6. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that the deduction under section 36(1)(viia) of the Act in respect of any provision of bad and doubtful debts made by a bank comes with the ceiling of prescribed percentage of the total income computed before making any deduc…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. VIDYA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 399/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali

…me Tax Appeal No.53 of 2014), (2) Peoples Co-operative Bank Ltd. (Income Tax Appeal No.57 and 58 of 2014), (3) Nanded District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (supra) and (4) Vasantadada Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd (Income Tax Appeal No.68 of 2014) reported as 379 ITR 24. We find no reason to take a contrary view. Thus, impugned order is justified and warrants no interference. The appeal of Revenue is dismissed, accordingly. 5. In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on Wednesday, the 08th day of May, 2019. (R.S. SYAL) (VIKAS AWASTHY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे Pune; "दन…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. PUNE CANTONMENT SAHAKARI BANK LTD,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 435/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj DandgavelFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Haldar
Section 145Section 148Section 154Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43D

…hand, reiterated the submissions made before AO and Ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the issue in the present case is also covered in assessee’s favour by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd., (2015) 379 ITR 24 (Bom). He thus supported the order of Ld.CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to taxing of interest accrued on NPAs. We find that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has held that interest on NPAs cannot be said to be accrued to the assessee and ther…

DCIT 1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6540/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Section 143(3)Section 43D

…interference in the order of CIT(A). Mumbai District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. 6. Apart therefrom, the learned representative for the assessee pointed out that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs M/s. Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Ors., 379 ITR 24 (Bom.), has considered an identical situation and held that in the case of a co-operative bank, the prudential norms issued by the RBI are applicable and interest on sticky advances identified in terms of such prudential norms is not taxable on mere mercantile basis. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT(A) vs Bijapur District Centra…

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2