DCIT CIR 2, KALYAN V. AMBERNATH JAI-HIND CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, AMBERNATH

ITA 4268/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1762 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINITA MENON
• Keywords: Capital asset; Business income; Depreciation; Cost of acquisition; Revenue expenditure; Reassessment proceedings; Capital expenditure

Judgement Text

A IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 4268 /MUM/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, KALYAN, 2 ND FLOOR, MOHAN PLAZA, WAYALE NAGAR, KHADAKPADA, KALYAN (W). / V. M/S AMBERNATH JAI - HIND COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., 42, PURVADARSHAN, L.T. MARG, AMBERNATH (W), PIN 421 501. ./ PAN : AAAAJO263F ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY MS. VINITA MENON ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PIYUSH CHHAJED / DATE OF HEARING : 17-12-2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30-12-2015 !' / O R D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL, FILED BY THE REVENUE, BEING ITA NO. 42 68/MUM/2014, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27-03-2014 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- II, THANE (HE REINAFTER CALLED THE CIT(A)), FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN T HE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED WITH THE TRIBUNAL READ AS UNDER:- ITA 4268/M/14 2 1) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT{A) WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE INVESTMENT S IN CASE OF BANK ARE STOCK-IN-TRADE, WHEN ADMITTEDLY THE GOVERNMENT SECU RITIES WERE TO BE HELD BY THE BANK TILL ITS MATURITY. 2) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE CIT{A) WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE PROPORTION ATE AMOUNT DEBITED TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT IS REVENUE IN NATURE AND THUS ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE. 3) THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNE D CIT{A)-II, THANE BE CANCELLED AND THAT OF THE A.O. BE RESTORED . 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS A CO-OPERATIVE BANK REGISTERED UNDER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, ENGAGE D IN THE BANKING BUSINESS. 4.THE ASSESSEE BANK HAS DEBITED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 28 ,85,418/- TO P&L ACCOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF AMORTIZATION OF GOVERNMENT SE CURITIES. THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED FOR AMORTIZATION OF PREMIUM ON INVESTMENT I N GOVERNMENT SECURITIES (HELD TO MATURITY HTM) REPRESENTS THE EXCESS OF A CQUISITION COST OVER THE FACE VALUE OF HTM SECURITIES, WHICH IS AMORTIZED BY THE BANKS AS PER THE DIRECTIVES OF RBI. THE RBI HAS ISSUED THE FOLLOWIN G GUIDELINE IN RESPECT OF INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO OF THE BANKS VIDE MASTER CIRCU LAR PRUDENTIAL NORMS FOR CLASSIFICATION, VALUATION AND OPERATION OF INVESTME NT PORTFOLIO BY BANKS VIDE RBI NO. 2004-05/51 DBOD NO. BP.BC 11/21.04.141/2004 -05 DATED 17/07/2004. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CIRCULAR IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: 2. CLASSIFICATION I) THE ENTIRE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO OF THE BANKS (INCLU DING SLR SECURITIES AND NON SLR SECURITIES) SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED UNDER THREE CATEGORIES VIZ. HELD TO MATURITY , AVAILABLE FOR SALE AND HELD FOR TRADING. II) BANKS SHOULD DECIDE THE CATEGORY OF THE INVESTMENT AT THE TIME OF ACQUISITION AND THE DECISION SHOULD BE RECORDED ON THE INVESTMENT PROPOSAL. ITA 4268/M/14 3 HELD TO MATURITY(HTM) I) THE SECURITIES ACQUIRED BY THE BANKS WITH THE INTEN TION TO HOLD THEM UPTO MATURITY WILL BE CLASSIFIED UNDER HELD TO MATURITY. AVAILABLE FOR SALE(AFS) AND HELD FOR TRADING(HFT) I) THE SECURITIES ACQUIRED BY THE BANKS WITH THE INTEN TION TO TRADE BY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE SHORT TERM PRICE/INTEREST R ATE MOVEMENTS WILL BE CLASSIFIED UNDER HELD FOR TRADING. II) THE SECURITIES WHICH DO NOT FALL WITHIN THE ABOVE TWO CATEGORIES WILL BE CLASSIFIED UNDER AVAILABLE FOR SALE. III) THE BANKS WILL HAVE THE FREEDOM TO DECIDE ON THE EX TENT OF HOLDINGS UNDER AVAILABLE FOR SALE AND HELD FOR TRADING CATEG ORIES. THIS WILL BE DECIDED BY THEM AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS ASPECT S SUCH AS BASIS OF INTENT, TRADING STRATEGIES, RISK MANAGEMEN T CAPABILITIES , TAX PLANNING, MANPOWER SKILLS, CAPITAL POSITION. III) THE INVESTMENTS CLASSIFIED UNDER HELD FOR TRADING C ATEGORY WOULD BE THOSE FROM WHICH THE BANK EXPECTS TO MAKE A GAIN BY THE MOVEMENT IN THE INTEREST RATES/MARKET RATES. THESE SECURITIES ARE TO BE SOLD WITHIN 90 DAYS. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER(HEREINAFTER CALLED T HE AO) HELD THAT THE AFS AND HFT SECURITIES ARE IN THE NATURE OF STOCK IN T RADE WHILE HTM SECURITIES ARE IN THE NATURE OF CAPITAL ASSETS. HENCE, FOR TH E PURPOSE OF INCOME TAX, FOR THEIR VALUATION AT YEAR END, THE AFS AND HFT SECURI TIES ARE TO BE VALUED AT COST OR MARKET , WHICHEVER IS LESS PRINCIPLE, WHER EAS THE HTM SECURITIES REPRESENTS INVESTMENT IN CAPITAL ASSET HAVE TO BE V ALUED AT COST ONLY AND NOT AT COST OR MARKET VALUE, WHICHEVER IS LESS OR ANY OTHER PRINCIPLE. THE A.O. ALSO RELIED ON THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 17 OF 2008 DATED 26-11-2008 AND HELD THAT AMORTIZATION EXPENSES DEBITED TO PROFIT A ND LOSS OF AN AMOUNT OF ITA 4268/M/14 4 RS. 28,85,418/- ON ACCOUNT OF AMORTIZATION OF GOVER NMENT SECURITIES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BANK IS NOT A REVENUE EXPENDITURE B UT IS A CAPITAL IN NATURE AND HENCE CANNOT BE CLAIMED AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE. THUS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BANK OF AN AMOUNT OF RS. 28,85,418/- ON A CCOUNT OF AMORTIZATION OF GOVERNMENT SECURITIES WAS DENIED. 5.AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE AO, THE ASSESSEE B ANK PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSE E BANK BASED UPON THE DECISION OF ASSESSEE BANKS OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2009-10 AND HELD THAT THE BANK HAS TO MAINTAIN THE GOVERNMENT SECURITIES AS PER STATUTORY LIQUIDITY RATIO (SLR) AS PER RBI G UIDELINES AND ACCORDINGLY TO MAINTAIN THE SLR, THE BANK HAS TO INVEST IN THE GOVERNMENT SECURITIES, WHICH ARE TRADED IN THE MARKET AND CARRIED COUPON R ATE. THE SAID INVESTMENTS ARE LONG TERM AND THEREFORE HAD BEEN CL ASSIFIED AS HELD TO MATURITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RBI GUIDELINES AND THE PREMIUM PAID ON THE INVESTMENTS IN THESE SECURITIES IS NOTHING BUT COST OF NEUTRALIZING THE GAIN OF INTEREST WHEN COMPARED TO MARKET RATE OF INTEREST O N THE DATE OF ACQUISITION AND THE COUPON RATE OF THE SECURITY, HENCE, THE CIT (A) ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF AMORTIZING OF INVESTMENT ON PREMIUM I NVESTMENT AMOUNTING TO RS. 28,85,418/-. 6.AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A), THE REVENU E IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. THE LD. D.R. RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE A.O. WH ILE THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BANK SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUA RELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BANK BY THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINAT E BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE BANKS OWN CASE IN ITA NO. 7548/MUM/2011 A ND ITA NO. 6995/MUM/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 AND 2009-10 ORDER DATED ITA 4268/M/14 5 19-02-2014 AND FOLLOWED BY ITA NO. 104/MUM/2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ORDER DATED 21-01-2015. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERE D IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BANK BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE BA NKS OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 & 2009-10 IN ITA NO. 7548/ MUM/2011 AND ITA NO. 6995/MUM/2012 VIDE CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 19. 02.2014 FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IN ITA NO. 104/MUM/2012 VIDE ORDERS DATED 21.01.2015 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL THA T THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BANK IS AS PER RBI GUIDELINES AND CBDT DIR ECTIONS WHICH ALLOWED PREMIUM TO BE AMORTIZED OVER THE REMAINING PERIOD O F THE MATURITY, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BANK IS ALLOWABLE. THE TRIBUNAL ORD ER FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 AND 2009-10 IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- 1. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS IS ID ENTICAL. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER: GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2007-08 : 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)- IL, THANE, IS RIGHT IN UPHOLDING TH E ASSESSEE'S CLAIM THAT EXPENSES INCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF PREMIUM PAID ON PUR CHASE OF GOVERNMENT SECURITIES IS REVENUE EXPENDITURE AS AGA INST THE A. O. 'S VIEW OF IT BEING CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)- II, THANE IS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY WAY PREMIUM PAID ON PURCHASE OF GOVERNMENT SECUR ITIES COULD BE AMORTIZED AND DEBITED TO PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT. GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR A. Y 2009-10 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE INVESTMENTS IN CASE OF BANK ARE STOCK-IN TRADE, WHEN ADMITTEDLY, THE GOVERNMENT SEC URITIES WERE TO BE HELD BY THE BANK TILL ITS MATURITY. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE PROPORTION ATE AMOUNT DEBITED ITA 4268/M/14 6 TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT IS REVENUE IN NATURE AND THUS ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE. 2. THE PREMIUM AMOUNT PAID ON ACQUISITION OF GOVERN MENT SECURITIES WAS AMORTIZED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IN THIS PROCESS A SUM OF RS.22,65,480/- AND RS.28,41,713/- FOR A.Y 2007-08 AND A.Y 2009-10 RESP ECTIVELY WERE CLAIMED AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE UNDER THE HEAD 'AMORTIZATION OF INVESTMENT'. HOWEVER, THE AO HAS TREATED SUCH EXPENDITURE AS CAPITAL EXPE NDITURE AND ADDED THE SAID AMOUNT TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE DISA LLOWANCE WAS AGITATED IN THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE DEPARTMENT IS AGGRIEVED, HENCE, HAS F ILED THE AFOREMENTIONED GROUND: 3. AFTER NARRATING THE FACTS LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF AO. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THIS IS SUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS O F THE TRIBUNAL: 1. ITA NO.722 & 1003/COCH/2008 & ITA NO. 935/COCH/2 008 IN THE CASE OF THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. ORDER DATED 31/5 /2011 2. CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., VS. ACIT, 38 SOT 533( COCH} 3. ACIT VS. OZER MERCHANT COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., (2 014) 41 TAXMAN.COM 110(PUNE} 4. ACIT VS. THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD., ITA NO.2246 TO 2250/MUM/2009 ORDER DATED 22;-12/2010 . REFERENCE WAS MADE TO THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.2246 TO 2250/MUM/2009: 15. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT I S NOT IN DISPUTE THAT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ALL INVESTMENT IS STOCK IN TRA DE WHICH IS ACCEPTING BY THE DEPARTMENT SINCE LONG. FOR THE FIRST TIME THIS POIN T WAS RAISED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1982-83 TO 1984-85. IN. THESE YEARS THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR VIDE M. A. NOS. 2,3 &4 (JDPR )/2000 ORDER DATED 14/12/2002 HAS HELD THAT IN THE CASE OF THE BANK (A SSESSEE) THE INVESTMENT IS STOCK IN TRADE AND ENTIRE LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF DIMINI SHING IN VALUE HAS BEEN ALLOWED AS DEDUCTION. THIS JUDGMENT HAS BEEN ACCEPT ED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND NO APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE RAJASTHA N HIGH COURT. 16. SINCE BEGINNING THE LOSS OF INVESTMENT BEING LO SS ON ACCOUNT OF DIMINISHING IN VALUE OF INVESTMENT (STOCK IN TRADE) INCLUDING AMORTIZATION IS ALLOWED AS BUSINESS LOSS AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALL OWED THE SAME AND ACCEPTED THIS POSITION SINCE LONG IN ALL THESE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 17. IN THE CASE OF THE BANK ALL INVESTMENTS ARE STO CK IN TRADE AS HELD BY HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF UCO BANK REPOR TED AT 240 ITR 355. ITA 4268/M/14 7 THERE IS NO INVESTMENT IN THE NATURE OF INVESTMENT ON WHICH THE EXPENDITURE/ LOSS CAN BE TREATED IN THE NATURE OF CAPITAL EXPEND ITURE. THE SECURITIES ARE CATEGORIZED AS PER THE NORMS OF THE RBI. AS PER THE 'SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES' GIVEN IN SCHEDULE 17 ATTACHED WITH THE BA LANCE SHEET EVERY YEAR, THE FACT THAT ALL INVESTMENTS ARE STOCK IN TRADE HAS BE EN CLARIFIED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. IT DOES NOT MEAN THE SECURITIES KEPT IN C ATEGORY OF HTM CANNOT BE SOLD BEFORE THE MATURITY. THE HTM HAS BEEN SOLD IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR AND INCOME/ LOSS TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME/ LOSS AND N OT AS CAPITAL GAIN/ LOSS AT ALL. 18. ALL INCOME/LOSS WHATEVER ARISING ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT (STOCK IN TRADE) INTEREST LOSS/PROFITS OR DIMINISHING OF INVESTMENT INCLUDING SECURITIES HELD UNDER HTM CATEGORY HAS BEEN TREATED AS BUSINESS INC OME/ LOSS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN TREATED BY DEPARTMENT AS BUSINESS AND ASSE SSED ACCORDINGLY IN ALL PAST YEAR ASSESSMENT BY DEPARTMENT. THE INTEREST EA RNED IN THE CASE OF THE BANK, ON ALL SHARE AND SECURITY ASSETS ARE STOCK IN TRADE AND WHATEVER THE LOSS/PROFIT ARE NOT IN THE NATURE OF CAPITAL. THE E NTIRE INTEREST INCOME OF SECURITIES UNDER WHATEVER CATEGORY HAD BEEN AND IS BEING ASSESSED IN ALL THESE YEARS AS BUSINESS INCOME. THEREFORE, AS SUCH DIFFER ENT CATEGORIES OF THE INCOME DOES NOT FORM(HTM) AS CAPITAL IN NATURE. 19. AS STATED EARLIER, THE FIGURE OF RS. 65. 62 LA CS REPRESENTS THE AMORTIZATION OF PREMIUM FOR SECURITIES HELD UNDER HTM CATEGORY, WHICH HAS BEEN WRITTEN OFF IN TERMS OF THE RBI CIRCULAR DATED 16/10/2000. PARA 14 OF THE SAID CIRCULAR READS AS UNDER: '14. INVESTMENTS CLASSIFIED UNDER HELD TO MATURITY CATEGORY NEED NOT TO BE MARKED TO MARKET AND WILL BE CARRIED AT ACQUISIT ION COST UNLESS IT IS MORE THAN THE FACE VALUE, IN WHICH CASE THE PREMIUM SHOULD BE AMORTIZED OVER THE PERIOD REMAINING TO MATURITY. VIDE REI CIRCULAR NO.DBOD NO.BP.B.C 32/21:04.08/200 0-01 DATED 16/10/2000, BANK MAY SHIFT INVESTMENT TO/FROM HTM C ATEGORY WITH APPROVAL OF BOARD FROM/TO OTHER CATEGORY. FURTHER I N TERMS OF ABOVE REFERRED CIRCULAR, PROFIT ON SALE OF INVESTMENTS IN HTM CATEGORY SHOULD BE TAKEN TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. THERE IT I S VERY CLEAR THAT SECURITIES HELD UNDER HTM CATEGORY CAN BE SOLD BY B ANK AT ANY POINT OF TIME. THEREFORE, THESE SECURITIES ARE BEING AS STOC K IN TRADE AND PROFIT/ LOSS ON SALE OF THESE SECURITIES ARE TREATED AS BUS INESS INCOME/LOSS. 20. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER FILED A COPY OF CBDT I NSTRUCTION NO.17 DATED 26/11/2008 PUBLISHED IN 220 CTR.(STATUTE PAGES 41 T O 44). THE CBDT IN PARA (VII) OF THIS INSTRUCTION HAS STATED THAT IN T HE CASES OF BANKS WHERE RBI HAD ISSUED GUIDELINES FOR ALLOWING DEDUCTION OF AMO RTIZATION PREMIUM PAID ON SECURITIES UNDER HTM CATEGORY. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF INSTRUCTION IS AS UNDER: ITA 4268/M/14 8 'AS PER RBI GUIDELINES DATED 16TH OCTOBER, 2000, TH E INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO OF THE BANKS IS REQUIRED TO BE CLASSIFIED UNDER THREE CATEGORIES VIZ. HELD TO MATURITY (HTM), HELD FOR TRADING (HFT) AND AVAILABL E FOR SALE (AFS). INVESTMENTS CLASSIFIED UNDER HTM CATEGORY NEED NOT BE MARKED TO MARKED AND ARE CARRIED AT ACQUISITION COST UNLESS THESE AR E MORE THAN THE FACE VALUE, IN WHICH CASE THE PREMIUM SHOULD BE AMORTIZED OVER THE PERIOD REMAINING TO MATURITY. IN THE CASE OF HFT AND AFS SECURITIES FOR MING STOCK IN TRADE OF THE BANK, THE DEPRECIATION/ APPRECIATION IS TO BE AGGRE GATED SCRIP WISE AND ONLY NET DEPRECIATION, IF ANY, IS REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDE D FOR THE ACCOUNTS. THE LATEST GUIDELINES OF THE RBI MAY BE REFERRED TO FOR ALLOWI NG ANY SUCH CLAIMS. 21. SINCE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS AS PER RBI G UIDELINES AND CBDT HAS ALSO ISSUED DIRECTIONS TO ALLOW PREMIUM TO BE AMORT IZED REMAINING WITH THE MATURITY, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIREC TED TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AMOUNTING TO RS. 65,51,8267/-. 22. SINCE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTED ON MERITS THE GROUND WITH REGARD TO CHALLENGING OF THE VALIDITY OF CIT(A)'S O RDER HOLDING INITIATION OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TO BE INVALID IS NOT TAKEN UP FOR CONSIDERATION. 23. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED'. 5. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE EXPENSES RELATE TO ' HELD TO MATURITY' (HTM) CATEGORY AND THIS POSITION HAS BEEN CLARIFIED IN RB I CIRCULAR DATED 16/10/2000 IN PARA 14 AND THE POSITION EXPLAINED BY RBI HAS BEEN APPROVED BY CBDT VIDE INSTRUCTION NO.17 DATED 26/11/2008. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ABOVE MENTIONED DOCUMENTS I.E. GUIDELINE OF RBI AND CIRCULAR OF CBDT, ARE REFERRED IN THE AFOREMENTIONED ORDER. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND THEIR CONTENT IONS HAVE CAREFULLY BEEN CONSIDERED. THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE I S SQUARELY COVERED BY THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL. RESPECTFUL LY FOLLOWING THE SAME WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAIS ED BY THE REVENUE . ACCORDINGLY, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL (SUPRA) IN ASSESSEE BANKS OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AND 2009-1 0 AND SEPARATE ORDERS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL FILED W ITH THE TRIBUNAL AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISS THE SAME. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY ITA 4268/M/14 9 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH DECEMBER, 2015. !' # $% &! ' 30-12-2015 ( ) SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ 8 MUMBAI ; &! DATED 30 -12-2015 [ .9../ R.K. R.K. R.K. R.K. , EX. SR. PS ! '#$% &%# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. : ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4. : / CIT- CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. =>( 99?@ , ?@ , $ 8 / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI H BENCH 6. (BC D / GUARD FILE. ' / BY ORDER, = 9 //TRUE COPY// (/') * ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ 8 / ITAT, MUMBAI