The Kannur Dist.Co-op Bank Ltd, Kannur V. DCIT, Kannur

ITA 160/COCH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2558 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M ANIL KUMAR; SUSAN GEORGE VARGHESE

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JM AND B.R.BASKAR AN, AM I.T.A. NO.160 /COCH/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 THE KANNUR DIST. CO-OP BANK LTD., 545A, JILA BANK BUILDING, KANNUR. [PAN:AABFT 6295R] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR. (ASSESSEE -APPELLANT) (REVENUE-R ESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY NONE REVENUE BY SMT. SUSAN GEORGE VARGHESE, SR. DR AND SHRI M. ANIL KUMAR, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING 04/06/2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 07/06/2013 O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01-01-2013 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), KOZHIKODE AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVE R, THE LD. DR POINTED OUT THAT THE ISSUE URGED IN THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED AGA INST THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN CASE RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AND THE DEC ISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IS REPORTED IN 136 ITD 102. HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL EX PARTE ON MERITS. 3. THE SOLITARY ISSUE URGED IN THIS APPEAL RELA TES TO THE DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE U/S 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUC TION UNDER THAT SECTION @ 7.5% OF THE TOTAL INCOME PLUS 10% OF THE AGGREGATE AVERAGE RURAL ADVANCES GIVEN BY RURAL BRANCHES. THE AO, HOWEVER, RESTRICTED THE DEDUCTIO N TO 7.5% OF THE TOTAL INCOME, I.E., I.T.A. NO.160 /COCH/2013 2 HE REJECTED THE CLAIM OF 10% OF AGGREGATE AVERAGE A DVANCES GIVEN RURAL BRANCHES ON THE GROUND THAT NONE OF THE BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSE E COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS RURAL BRANCH AS PER THE DEFINITION GIVEN IN SEC. 36(1)(V IIA) OF THE ACT. THE LD CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO ON THIS ISSUE. HENCE , THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HEARD LD D.R AND ALSO CAREFULLY PERUSED THE R ECORD. WE NOTICE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JUR ISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. LORD KRISHNA BANK LTD. (339 ITR 606 ), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE WORD PLACE REFERRED TO IN THE DEFINITION OF RURAL BRAN CH SHOULD BE TAKEN AS A VILLAGE. THE TERM RURAL BRANCH IS DEFINED AS UNDER IN SEC. 36( 1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT. RURAL BRANCH MEANS A BRANCH OF A SCHEDULED BANK O R A NON-SCHEDULED BANK SITUATED IN A PLACE WHICH HAS A POPULATION OF NOT MORE THAN TEN THOUSA ND ACCORDING TO THE LAST PRECEDING CENSUS OF WHICH THE RELEVANT FIGURES HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BEFORE THE FIRST DAY OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE AO HAS POINTED OUT THAT NO NE OF THE BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE- BANK FALLS WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF RURAL BRANCH AS GIVEN IN SEC. 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, AS THE POPULATION OF THE VILLAGE SERVICED BY THE BRANC HES IS MORE THAN RS.10,000/-. HENCE, THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT 10% OF TH E AGGREGATE AVERAGE ADVANCES MADE BY THE RURAL BRANCHES WAS DISALLOWED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER AND IT WAS ALSO CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) BY FOLLOWING THE DECISI ON OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LORD KRISHNA BANK (REFERRED SUPRA). 5. WE NOTICE THAT THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS CO NSIDERED AN IDENTICAL ISSUE IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN I.T.A. NOS. 323 & 433/COCH/2 010 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 (136 ITD 102) AND THE TRIBUNAL, BY FOL LOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN THE CASE OF LORD KRISHNA BANK LTD. (REFERRED SUPRA), HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION OF 10% OF AVERAGE ADVANCES MADE BY ITS BRANCHES. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL , THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN AN ALTERNATIVE PLEA THAT THE DEFINITION OF RURAL BRAN CH GIVEN U/S. 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT SHALL NOT APPLY TO IT AND ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS CONTE NDED THAT THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE I.T.A. NO.160 /COCH/2013 3 JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF LORD KRISH NA BANK (REFERRED SUPRA) SHALL NOT APPLY TO IT. HOWEVER, THE SAID ALTERNATIVE PLEA WA S ALSO REJECTED BY THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL. SINCE THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE LD. C IT(A) IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECISION RENDERED BY THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH HIS ORDER. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 0 7-06-2013. SD/- SD/- (N.R.S.GANESAN) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: KOCHI DATED: 7TH JUNE, 2013 GJ COPY TO: 1. THE KANNUR DIST. CO-OP BANK LTD., 545A, JILA BAN K BUILDING, KANNUR. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS), KOZHIKO DE. 3.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOZHIKODE. 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN. 5. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) I.T.A.T, COCHIN