TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the interest of substantial justice and fairness to both the rival parties, as also that adjudication of this issue will require enquiries and verification of the facts, we are inclined to set aside the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits and in accordance with law. The ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass detailed, reasoned and speaking order after making such enquiries and verifications as he may deem fit. CIT(A) shall give proper and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with principles of natural justice in accordance with law, and evidence/explanations submitted by assessee in its defence shall be admitted by ld. CIT(A) in the interest of justice - DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Sh. Rohit Mehra, CIT. DR For the Respondent : Sh. Parveen Jindal, CA. ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, J.M.: The instant appeal of the revenue and Cross Appeal of the assessee are filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bathinda, [in brevity the CIT (A) ] order passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or bad and doubtful debts u/s 36(l)(viia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Rs. 18,80,80,712/- being 10% of average rural advances made by the assessee bank. 4. The appellate may be allowed to add, amend, alter or raise additional grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed of. 4. The assessee has also taken the following additional grounds: Sub.: Submission of Additional Evidence under Rule-29 of the Income-tax (Appellate / Tribunal) Rules, 1963 in Appeal No. ITA 354/ASR/2018 in the case of The Muktsar Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Bathinda for the A.Y. 2014-15 (Assessee s Appeal) (Fixed for 06/09/2022) During the hearing held on 06/07/2022, the Hon ble Tribunal directed the appellant-assessee to submit additional evidence under Rule-29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 in the matter of additions for Rs. 85,11,141/- (Ground No. 2 as per Form-36) confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 19/03/2018. In this connection, we submit as under: i) That in the ITR for the A.Y. 2014-15, the assessee claimed net deduction for Rs. 85,11,141/- on account of adjustment in expenditure and income which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugh memorandum of changes, (MOC) made by the statutory auditor during finalisation of financial statement for F.Y. 2013-14 amount to Rs. 85,11,141/- and has not allowing the claim higher deduction for provision of bad and doubtful debts u/s 36(1)(viia) of the Act amount to Rs. 18,80,80,712/- being 10% of average rural advance made by the assessee bank. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) only allowed the relief amount to Rs. 5,64,17,644/- related to interest receivable on NPA. The rest amount was not taken as there is no proper ground was taken by the assessee. However, other deductions claimed by the assessee are duly rejected by the ld. CIT(A). Being aggrieved both the parties filed an appeal before us. I.T.A. No. 313/Asr/2018 5. The ld. AR invited our attention in appeal order page 17, the relevant para is extracted as below: I have considered only those amounts which have been admittedly included in P L account to the extent of Rs. 9,76,17,644/- which cannot be added because these are already offered to tax in the year under consideration. 1 have also discussed above that the amount of Rs. 5,64,64,785/- which is interest on N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the assessee considering the Real Income. The income can be said to be accrued only when there is reasonable of receiving the same in the near future. In the case of NPA s, there is no such certainty and therefore no interest income has even accrued to the assessee under the Mercantile System of Accounting on the loans classified as Non- performing Assets. That the Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions made by the assessee vide submissions dated 27/02/2018, wherein the assessee relied upon certain decisions also in the matter, deleted the additions for Rs. 5,64,64,785/-. The appellant relies upon above submissions as made before the Ld. CIT(A) during appellate proceedings vide submission dated 27/02/2018 before your good self also. Copy of submission dated 27/02/2018 enclosed in the accompanying Paper Book from Page No. 4 to 14. 5. That the assessee may bring to the notice of this Hon ble Bench that the issue relating to chargeability of interest on NPA s of Co-operative Banks has been decided by this very Tribunal in favour of the assessee in the case of DCIT, Cicle-Moga Vs. The Moga Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. vide order dated 04/10/2017 in ITA Nos. 222 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR withdraw the ground no. 3. So, the ground nos. 1 and 2 are remained for adjudication. 8.1 Ground No. 1 The ld. AR first pointed out that the ground no. 1 is related to the interest recoverable as on dated 31.03.2014 amount to Rs.60,22,615/- which was not adjudicating by the ld. CIT(A) as the ground was not taken separately before the first appellate authority. The ld.AR had drawn our attention in page 17 of the appeal order. The relevant para is extracted as below: I have considered only those amounts which have been admittedly included in P L account to the extent of Rs. 9,76,17,644/- which cannot be added because these are already offered to tax in the year under consideration. 1 have also discussed above that the amount of Rs. 5,64,64,785/- which is interest on NPA cannot be taxed as discussed above. However, no adjudication can be done about Rs. 60,22,615/- because there is no ground of appeal before me regarding the claim of the appellant that this amount has been offered in earlier years and added in the year under consideration again. In summation the appellant gets relief of Rs. 9,76,17,644/- and Rs. 5,64,64,785/- only. The ground of appeal is partl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
