TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 697X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urities when the same are acquired at the rate higher than the face value. Such amortisation would have to be for the remaining period of maturity. This precisely the Tribunal had directed in the impugned order. Though contended, no contrary instructions of CBDT are brought to our notice. The instruction in question having been issued under section 119(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, would bind th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the issue of disallowance of Amortized Premium amounting to ₹ 3,15,81,243/? 3. We take notice of the fact that the proposed question of law is no longer res-integra in view of the decision of this Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar dated November 26, 2008 and contended that the benefit of amortization had to be granted. The assessee as a cooperative bank was bound by the RBI directives. As per such directives, the assessee had to invest certain amounts in Government securities and to hold the same till maturity. In the process of acquisition, if there was any premium paid on the face value of the security, the loss had to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be provided for in the accounts. The latest guidelines of the RBI may be referred to for allowing any such claims. 7. The instructions clearly provide for amortisation of premium paid on acquisition of securities when the same are acquired at the rate higher than the face value. Such amortisation would have to be for the remaining period of maturity. This precisely the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
