Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 543 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s. 36(1)(vii) - assessee has claimed deduction of bad debts u/s. 36(1)(vii) without actually writing off the debts are irrecoverable in the individual loan accounts of the debtors concerned - HELD THAT:- Similar issue has also been decided by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bank of Baroda v. Addl. CIT, LTU [2023 (4) TMI 1169 - ITAT BANGALORE] in favour of the assessee. DR has submitted that the Hon’ble Apex court has admitted the SLP filed by the revenue but the status of the same could not be furnished by the ld. DR, accordingly, we are bound by the order of the Jurisdictional High Court till the date of passing of the final order by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Accordingly respectfully following the above decisions, we direct the AO to delete the addition made u/s. 36(1)(vii). This ground for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 is allowed. Disallowance of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) - whether for computing the aggregate average advances made by rural branches, as per Rule 6ABA, only the fresh advances made during the month, or the outstanding loans at the end of each month, should be considered? - HELD THAT:- We notice that the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT, LTU v. Canara Bank [2023 (1) TMI 243 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] held that amounts of advances as outstanding at the last day of each month would be a fluctuating figure depending on the outstanding as increased or reduced respectively by advances made and repayments received. The assessee might provided for bad and doubtful debts but the deduction would only be allowed at the percentage of aggregate average advance, computation of which is prescribed by rule 6ABA. We find from the amended direction made by the Tribunal that such direction is in terms of rule 6ABA. The ITO has made the computation of aggregate monthly advances taking loans and advances made during only the previous year relevant to assessment year 2009-10 as confirmed by CIT(A). The Tribunal amended such direction, in our view, correctly applying the rule. Applicability of the provisions of section 115JB to the Appellant Bank - HELD THAT:- As decided in assessee own case [2022 (3) TMI 134 - ITAT BANGALORE] We notice that the provisions of sec.51 of the Act specifically states that only certain provisions of BR Act are applicable to “Corresponding new bank”. We noticed earlier that the Ld CIT(A) has proceeded to decide this issue by observing that all provisions of BR Act are applicable to the Company. We notice that the Ld CIT(A) did not consider the effect of provisions of sec.51 of the BR Act upon the assessee. Hence the decision taken by him under the impression that all the provisions of BR Act are applicable to the assessee is faulted one. In our view the Ld CIT(A) should considered the effect of provisions of sec. 51 of BR Act and accordingly he should have appreciated the contentions of the assessee on the definition of “banking company”, provisions of sec.211(2) of the Companies Act etc. Since these aspects go to the root of the issue, in our view, this issue needs to be examined at the end of Ld CIT(A) afresh
|