UCO Bank v. CIT

237 ITR 889Supreme Court of India1999#145 most cited

What is UCO Bank v. CIT authority for?

CBDT circulars and instructions, while not binding on courts or assessees, are strictly binding on income-tax departmental authorities, who cannot act in contravention of them.

486

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

UCO Bank v. CIT · 237 ITR 889 · Supreme Court · CBDT circulars binding on department · instructions to tax authorities · section 119 · income tax authorities bound by circulars · contravention of instructions · 143(2) notices · scope of scrutiny

Also reported as

104 Taxmann 547

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 148Section 132Section 250Section 143(2)Section 147Section 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

section 119(1)installation pesection 5(8)section 119(2)(a)dependent agent peagency peservice pefunctional analysisclosely held companysection 150far analysissection 119

Judgments citing UCO Bank v. CIT

The DCIT(OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 817/AHD/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…sident for services rendered outside India becomes allowable expenditure". The appellant submits that the Circular issued by the Board is binding on the Assessing Officer in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (104- Taxman 547). The appellant therefore submits that provisions of 3. 195 on such payments of sales commission are not attracted at all. 10.6 The appellant most respectfully submits that the main objection of the Id. AO was that the said expenditure is required to be added u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act as per the Karnataka High Court decision in th…

Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 773/AHD/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…sident for services rendered outside India becomes allowable expenditure". The appellant submits that the Circular issued by the Board is binding on the Assessing Officer in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (104- Taxman 547). The appellant therefore submits that provisions of 3. 195 on such payments of sales commission are not attracted at all. 10.6 The appellant most respectfully submits that the main objection of the Id. AO was that the said expenditure is required to be added u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act as per the Karnataka High Court decision in th…

The DCIT(OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 692/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…sident for services rendered outside India becomes allowable expenditure". The appellant submits that the Circular issued by the Board is binding on the Assessing Officer in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (104- Taxman 547). The appellant therefore submits that provisions of 3. 195 on such payments of sales commission are not attracted at all. 10.6 The appellant most respectfully submits that the main objection of the Id. AO was that the said expenditure is required to be added u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act as per the Karnataka High Court decision in th…

Mr. Manoj Kumar Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. DDIT, International Taxation, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 389/CTK/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154(2)

…any good. The well meaning advice given by the CBDT must be implemented to the fullest extent. As to what is binding nature of this advice, we may only refer to s. 119 of the Act and Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of UCO Bank 19 vs. CIT [(1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC)]. Hon’ble Supreme Court has time and again held that the circulars of the CBDT are legally binding on the Revenue and that this binding character attaches to the circular even if they be found not in accordance with the correct interpretation of section or they depart or deviate from such construction. The advice contained in the circular, w…

The, ACIT, Guntur vs. The Guntur District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd., Tenali

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed and

ITA 75/VIZ/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36

…e income. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee following the real income theory and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO bank Vs. CIT 237 ITR 889. The Ld. CIT(A) held that concept of real income is certainly applicable in judging whether there has been income or not, whether the income is really M/s. The Guntur District Co-Op. Central Bank,Tenali accrued or arisen to the assessee must be in the light of the reality of situation. The tax must be on the real income but not on the notional…

ACIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co, . Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal raised by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6055/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhacit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Room No. 575, 5Th Floor, M.K. Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Road, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Marg, Ballard Estate, Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar with MsFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)
Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ACIT -2(1) M/s Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Room No. 575, 5th Floor, M.K. Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Road, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 PAN:AAACT2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. ACIT -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Vs. Mumbai-400001 PAN:AAACT2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT -2(1) M/s Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Room No. 561, 5th Floor,…

Addl CIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Bombay Dyeing & Mfg Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal raised by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 557/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhacit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Room No. 575, 5Th Floor, M.K. Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Road, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Marg, Ballard Estate, Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar with MsFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)
Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ACIT -2(1) M/s Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Room No. 575, 5th Floor, M.K. Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Road, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 PAN:AAACT2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. ACIT -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Vs. Mumbai-400001 PAN:AAACT2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT -2(1) M/s Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Room No. 561, 5th Floor,…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Maruti Securities Limited, Secundrabad

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

ITA 1651/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri K. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR

…s and peculiarities of the situations. The decision very heavily relied upon by the first appellate authority in the case of State Bank of Travancore Vs CIT (1986) 158 ITR 102 was subsequently overruled in its land mark decision in the case of UCO Bank Vs CIT 237 ITR 889. In this regard, we place reliance on the ratio laid down by various judicial authorities on the proposition that the income cannot be taxed on hypothetical basis, and it is only the real income that is to be brought to tax. In this behalf, we also rely, giving below summary of the ratio laid down, on the following decisions a) CIT vs. Godhra Ele…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu, Bangalore

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

ITA 865/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Canara Bank, Bsca Section, Head Office, J C Road, Bengaluru-560 002. Pan: Aaacc 6106 G … Appellant Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Ananathan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

…ntrusted with the responsibility of executing the provisions of the Act. 9.6 The jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Karnataka Bank (supra), after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Southern Technology (320 ITR 577) and UCO Bank (237 ITR 889) held that the directions of the RBI are only disclosed norms and they have nothing to do with computation of taxable income. The jurisdictional High Court further upheld the claim of the assessee-bank following the principle of consistency. Even the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of UCO Bank (supra) only laid down principle that where the invest…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax CIT (A) vs. M/S. City Co Operative Bank Ltd

ITA/560/2017HC Karnataka07 Mar 2018

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

Section 145Section 260

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018 PRESENT HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAY INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 560 OF 2017 BETWEEN 1. THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIT(A), “2ND FLOOR, SHREE TOWERS”, No.565/A, A1, OPPOSITE TO DRR HOSTEL, HADADI ROAD, DAVANGERE- 577 004. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, NO.70, 100 FEET ROAD, GOPALAGOWDA EXTENSION, SHIVAMOGA- 577 201. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.DILIP M, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K. V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND M/S.…

DCIT 1(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Elctricity Board, Mumbai

ITA 3559/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3559/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri H. N. Sinha, DRFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Sheth, AR
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)

…ami Satsang vs. CIT (1991) 100 CTR (SC) 267: (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC) applied; CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC), CIT vs. Modi Rubber Ltd. (1998) 148 CTR (Del) 448: (1998) 230 ITR 817 (Del), UCO Bank vs. CIT (1999) 154 CTR (SC) 88: (1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC), Godhra Electricity Co. vs. CIT (1997) 139 CTR (SC) 564: (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC) and Poona Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 521 (SC) relied on. (Paras 5, 5.2, 5.3, 5.9 & 5.12)" I am of the view that the impugned income is a hypothetical income until the dispute is settled. Respectfully following the above decisions, I hold…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Sharad Sahakari Bank Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal by the Revenue and cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1046/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha

…SCC 548. 7. The learned counsel for the respondent-co-operative banks submit that the issues involved in the above appeals are no more res integra in view of the decision rendered by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank v. CIT reported in [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SC) ; [1999] 4 SCC 599. 8. Learned counsel for respondent submits that the learned Tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeals of the Revenue by confirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). There is no substantial question of law involved in these appeals and, thus, all the appeals are liable to be dismissed. 9. The I…

The Pr.Commissioner of vs. M/S the Davanagere Urban

ITA/781/2017HC Karnataka28 Feb 2018

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

Section 145Section 260

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.781 OF 2017 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (A), “ 2ND FLOOR, SHREE TOWERS”, No.565/A, A-1, OPPOSITE TO DRR HOSTEL, HADADI ROAD, DAVANGERE-577 004. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME –TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), “2ND FLOOR, SHREE TOWERS”, No.565/A, A-1, OPPOSITE TO DRR HOSTEL, HADADI ROAD, DAVANGERE-577 0…

Kanchanjunga Impex P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4687/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Kanchanjunga Impex P. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, Gala No. 113 & 114, 1 St Floor, Ward 9(2)(2) Udyogbhavna, Sharma Indl Vs. Estate Goregaon (E) Mumbai-400 063 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaack4208P

For Appellant: Ashwin Chhag, ARFor Respondent: M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR
Section 119Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153

…crutiny of the assessee’s case and completion of the assessment was not valid. 6. We find that the Hon’ble Chhatishgarh High Court in Sunita Finlease Ltd.’s case (supra) has also considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank (1999) 237 ITR 889 and quoted from page 896 as under: “Such instructions may be by way of relaxation of any of the provisions of the sections specified there or otherwise. The Board thus has power, iter alia, to tone down the rigour of the law and ensure a fair enforcement of its provisions, by issuing circulars in the Income-tax Act, which are binding on the aut…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayapur vs. M/S.Deccan Urban Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Vijayapur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1595/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2012-13 Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. The Deccan Urban Co-Op Income Tax, Bank Ltd., Circle-1, M. G. Road, Vijayapur. Vijayapur. Pan : Aaaat 8050 A Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. Cit Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2018

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 43D

…classified as Nonperforming Assets?”. 9.4. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case of Canfin Homes Ltd., (2011) 201 Taxman 273/13 taxmann.com 43, mentioned supra, following the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs CIT, 237 ITR 889 (1999( has held as under: “Therefore……………………. Non-performing asset is an asset in respect of which interest has remained unpaid and has become past due. Once a particular asset is shown to be a non-performing asset then the assumption is it is not yielding any revenue. When it is not yielding ay revenue, the question of showing that revenue and p…

The Karnataka Bank Ltd., Mangalore vs. DCIT, Mangalore

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

ITA 1335/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…provisions of the Act. 9.6 The jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Karnataka Bank (supra), after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Southern Technology Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577/187 Taxman 346 and UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889/104 Taxman 547 (SC) held that the directions of the RBI are only disclosed norms and they have nothing to do with computation of taxable income. The jurisdictional High Court further upheld the claim of the assessee- bank following the principle of consistency. Even the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UCO Bank (supra) only laid down principle t…

ACIT, Mangalore vs. M/S Karnataka Bank Ltd., Mangalore

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

ITA 1265/BANG/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…provisions of the Act. 9.6 The jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Karnataka Bank (supra), after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Southern Technology Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577/187 Taxman 346 and UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889/104 Taxman 547 (SC) held that the directions of the RBI are only disclosed norms and they have nothing to do with computation of taxable income. The jurisdictional High Court further upheld the claim of the assessee- bank following the principle of consistency. Even the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UCO Bank (supra) only laid down principle t…

ACIT, Mangalore vs. M/S Karnataka Bank Ltd., Mangalore

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

ITA 1397/BANG/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…provisions of the Act. 9.6 The jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Karnataka Bank (supra), after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Southern Technology Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577/187 Taxman 346 and UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889/104 Taxman 547 (SC) held that the directions of the RBI are only disclosed norms and they have nothing to do with computation of taxable income. The jurisdictional High Court further upheld the claim of the assessee- bank following the principle of consistency. Even the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UCO Bank (supra) only laid down principle t…

ACIT, Mangalore vs. M/S Karnataka Bank Ltd., Mangalore

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

ITA 1396/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…provisions of the Act. 9.6 The jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Karnataka Bank (supra), after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Southern Technology Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577/187 Taxman 346 and UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889/104 Taxman 547 (SC) held that the directions of the RBI are only disclosed norms and they have nothing to do with computation of taxable income. The jurisdictional High Court further upheld the claim of the assessee- bank following the principle of consistency. Even the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UCO Bank (supra) only laid down principle t…

The Karnataka Bank Ltd., Mangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1335/BANG/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Raghavendra Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K.Jha, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…provisions of the Act. 9.6 The jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Karnataka Bank (supra), after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Southern Technology Ltd. v. Jt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 577/187 Taxman 346 and UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889/104 Taxman 547 (SC) held that the directions of the RBI are only disclosed norms and they have nothing to do with computation of taxable income. The jurisdictional High Court further upheld the claim of the assessee- bank following the principle of consistency. Even the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UCO Bank (supra) only laid down principle t…