IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1 599 / BANG/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2 0 10 - 11 M/S. SRI KANYAKAPARAMESHWARI CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., K.R. CIRCLE, MYSORE 570 001. PAN: AACAS1220M VS. THE JCIT, RANGE 1, MYSORE APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SURESH MUTHUKRISHNAN, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.N. SIDDAPPAJI, ADDL. CIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 1 4 .0 3 .2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22 .0 3 .2019 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), MYSORE DATED 30.10.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS EARLIER DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AS PER ORDER DATED 09.06.2017. LATER ON, THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER WAS RECALLED BY THE TRIBUNAL AS PER ITS ORDER IN M.P. NO. 320/BANG/2017 DATED 18.01.2019 FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF DECIDING GROUND NO. 15 RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AFTER NOTING THIS THAT THIS GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE, WE ARE NOW REQUIRED TO DECIDE GROUND NO. 15 RAISED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. GROUND NO. 15 IS AS UNDER. 15. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE ADJUDICATED UPON GROUND NO. 27 RAISED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE HIM AND CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN SUPPORT THEREOF CONTAINED IN PARAGRAPH 9 AT PAGE 7 OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FORMING PART OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BEFORE HIM AND ACCORDINGLY, OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE ADDITION TOWARDS INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON LOANS & ADVANCES CLASSIFIED AS NON-PERFORMING ASSETS SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO RS. 26,94,656 BEING THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON LOANS & ADVANCES CLASSIFIED AS NON-PERFORMING ASSETS FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR. ITA NO.1599/BANG/2014 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR OF ASSESSEE THAT AS PER THIS GROUND RAISED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THIS IS THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT GROUND NO. 27 RAISED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT (A) WAS NOT DECIDED BY CIT (A) AS PER IMPUGNED ORDER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT (A) FOR DECIDING GROUND NO. 27 RAISED BEFORE CIT (A). THE LD. DR OF REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT (A) BUT COULD NOT SHOW THAT GROUND NO. 27 RAISED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT (A) WAS DECIDED BY CIT (A). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND IN VIEW OF THE FACTS DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT (A) FOR DECIDING GROUND NO. 27 RAISED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE CIT (A). IN VIEW OF THIS DECISION, NO ADJUDICATION IS CALLED FOR ON MERIT OF THIS GROUND NO. 15 RAISED BEFORE US AND GROUND NO. 27 RAISED BEFORE CIT (A) AT THE PRESENT STAGE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (LALIET KUMAR) (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 22 ND MARCH, 2019. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.