TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT Vs Yokogawa India Ltd (2011 (8) TMI 766 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT) followed. Decision of non-jurisdictional high court - held that:- No doubts, the views so expressed are by a non jurisdictional High Court. However, there being nothing to the contrary by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, or, for that purpose, by any of the Hon’ble High Court, these views bind us as well. In any case, the set off of amortization with admissible depreciation does not appeal to us, nor any conceptual or legal basis for the same was demonstrated to us. However, we need not really deal with that aspect of the matter on this factual matrix. In view of these discussions, in respect of all the three issues, the impugned revision order is devoid of legally s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f investment in the books and not as per the Income Tax Act, thereby denying the deduction claimed at only Rs 322,56,23,861 instead of Rs 403,88,23,861 resulting in under assessment by Rs 81,32,00,000. Further, the grant of interest under section 244 A is also not in order. b) The Assessing Officer, while arriving at the book profit at Rs 90,43,01,458 f ailed to add provision made f or NPA u/s 36(vii)(a) amounting to Rs 275,57,00,392 and investment depreciation amounting to Rs 81,32,00,392, thereby resulting in under assessment of book profits of Rs 296,35,82,544. c) While finalizing the assessment, the AO should have reduced the amortized amount of Rs 10.51 crores from depreciation allowed on investment on being transferred from one ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ebited to the P L of Rs 257.57 crores is added back while computing the book profit under section 115JB, the bank should also be granted deduction of Rs 318.85 crores, being bad debts actually written off. On investment depreciation, it was contended that it was not a provision at all, and, therefore, no adjustments in the book profits can be made. Finally, as regards point (c), it was pointed out that amortization of premium on HTM securities has not been included in the investment depreciation, that this item is separately debited to P L account, and, as such, there is no understatement of income. Learned Commissioner was thus urged to drop the revision proceedings. None of these submissions, however, impressed the learned Commissioner. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order, the Assessing Officer is directed to bring on record all the relevant f acts and give clear finding on each of the issue discussed above . The assessee is aggrieved and is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered factual matrix of the case as also the applicable legal position. 5. We find that, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel, Rs 81.32 crores in respect of depreciation on investments has already been added back to assessee s income, vide appeal effect order dated 5th March 2010 (copy placed before us at page 34 of the paper-book), and as such revision order was not warranted in respect of the same. The appeal effect order stands merged with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is in that context the appellate Commissioner as well as the Tribunal has granted relief to the assessee. Realising the fatality of the said argument, it is contended now that item (i) cannot amount to satisfaction as provision for diminishing in the value of assets is substituted, in case of the assessee falls under Item (c). In meeting the aforesaid case, the learned counsel for the assessee brought to our notice the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Vijaya Bank ( supra) where the Apex Court had an occasion to consider his explanation. It accepted the argument on behalf of the Revenue to the effect that the explanation makes it very clear that there is a dichotomy between actual write off on the one hand and provision for bad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assets side of the balance sheet to the extent of the corresponding amount so that, at the end of the year, the amount of loans and advances/debtors is shown as net of the provisions for the Impugned bad debt. Therefore, in the first place if the bad debt or doubtful debt is reduced from the loans and advances or the debtors from the assets side of the balance sheet the Explanation to Section 115JA or JB is not at all attracted. In that context even if amendment which is made retrospective the benefit given by the Tribunal and the appellate Commissioner to the assessee is in no way affected. 6. No doubts, the views so expressed are by a non jurisdictional High Court. However, there being nothing to the contrary by Hon ble jurisdictional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
