CSB BANK LTD.,THRISSUR V. DCIT, THRISSUR

ITA 854/COCH/2023

AI Insights

The case involves CSB Bank Ltd., the appellant, contesting the orders related to the assessment year 2009-10. Initially, the AO made certain additions to the income declared by the bank, which were partly contested and resulted in a partial relief by the CIT(A). However, further disallowances were proposed by the AO under section 154, which the appellant contested due to the lack of opportunity to respond. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal's decision to remand the case highlights the importance of procedural fairness in tax assessments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 316000 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SATHISH MODI
• Keywords: Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 154; 37; 14A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JM ITA No. 854/Coch/2023 Assessment Year: 2009-10 CSB Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant CSB Bhawan, St. Marys College Road Thrissur 680020 [PAN: AABCT0024D] vs. DCIT, Circle - 1(1), Thrissur .......... Respondent Appellant by: Shri Sathish Modi, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 12.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 14.05.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)], dated 12.10.2023 for Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a banking company. The return of income for AY 2009-10 was filed on 24.09.2009 disclosing total income of Rs. 73,18,82,460/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the DCIT, Circle – 1(1), Thrissur (hereinafter called \"the AO\") vide order dated 23.12. 20111 u/s. 143(3) of the Act at a total income of 2 ITA No. 854/Coch/2023 CSB Bank Ltd. Rs. 73,29,78,611/-. While doing so, the AO made addition of Rs. 4,92,212/- by disallowing the payment of pension u/s. 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and also made a disallowance u/s. 14A of Rs. 6,03,939/- 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide order dated 19.02.2014 in appeal No. 16/RI/TCR/CIT(A)- V/2011-12 had partly allowed the appeal. The CIT(A) deleted the addition made on account of pension of Rs. 4,92,212/-. However, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition u/s. 14A of the Act. The AO passed consequential order giving effect to the order of the CIT(A) on 11.06.2014 and the AO had issued a notice u/s. 154 of the Act proposing to make the following disallowances:- i) Disallowance u/s. 14A of Rs. 20,87,731/- ii) Capital expenditure disallowance u/s. 37 of Rs. 2,70,787/- 4. In response to the show cause notice it is submitted that since the consequential order dated 11.06.2014 was not served on the appellant, it was unable to offer any explanation to the show cause notice. However, the AO has proceeded with passing of the order u/s. 154 after making disallowances proposed in the show cause notice vide order dated 24.03.2016. 5. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 3 ITA No. 854/Coch/2023 CSB Bank Ltd. 7. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the order passed by the AO u/s. 154 of the Act is illegal, inasmuch as, there are no mistake apparent from record in the order passed by the AO giving effect to the order of the CIT(A). There is no mistake apparent from record which are capable of being rectified u/s. 154 of the Act. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. We find that, when the appellant was issued a show cause notice u/s. 154 of the Act, the appellant had no reasonable opportunity to file objections against the proposed action u/s. 154, as the consequential order was not served on the appellant. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the matter requires remand to the file of the AO for fresh disposal of the matter in accordance with law decide the appeal in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant. We make it clear that all the contentions raised by the appellant before us are kept opened before the AO. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14th May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) JUDICIAL MEMBER (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 14th May, 2025 n.p. 4 ITA No. 854/Coch/2023 CSB Bank Ltd. Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin "