BANK OF MAHARASHTRA ,PUNE vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 259/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2016-17
Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S Ananthan & Smt. Abarna CAFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)
viia) should not be restricted to provision made for rural advances only and therefore why the differential amount of Rs.219.32 crore working as per Rule
6ABA of the Income Tax Rules. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs.879,11,91,472/-.
8. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC following