ITO, Jaipur V. M/S JAIPUR THAR GRAMIN BANK, Jaipur

ITA 547/JPR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 54723114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Competent authority
• Section: 37(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH: JAIPUR (BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. MEENA) I.T.A. NO. 547/JP/2012 ASSTT. YEAR- 2009-10 PAN NO. AAAJJ 0519 R THE I.T.O., M/S JAIPUR THAR GRAMIN BANK, WARD 2(2), JAIPUR. VRS. 56, SARDAR PATEL MARG, C-SCHEME, JAIPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY :- SMT. NEENA JEPH ASSESSEE BY :- SHRI ABHISHEK SHARMA DATE OF HEARING : 03/11/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31/12/2014 O R D E R PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27/04/2012 OF THE LEARNED C.I.T.(A)-I, JAIPUR FOR TH E A.Y. 2009-10. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST ALLOWING EXPENSES O F RS. 3,60,00,000/- U/S 36(I)(V) EVEN WHEN THE CONTRIBUTION WAS MADE TO AN UNAPPROVED GRATUITY FUND. 2. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE A SSESSEE IS A REGIONAL RURAL BANK CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING AND FINANCE. THE ITA 547/JP/2012 ITO VS. M/S JAIPUR THAR GRAMIN BANK 2 ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CL AIMED GRATUITY AMOUNTING TO RS. 3.60 CRORES DURING THE YEAR. THE AS SESSING OFFICER ASKED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS WHETHER THE SAID FUND I S APPROVED BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY TO JUSTIFY HIS CLAIM IN THE LIN E OF PROVISION OF SECTION 36(I)(V) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHO RT THE ACT). THE ASSESSEE REPLIED VIDE LETTER DATED 09/12/2011, IT WA S SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD APPLIED BEFORE THE COMPET ENT AUTHORITY BUT REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED SO F AR. HE FILED ALL THE PAPERS RELATING TO APPLICATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT DEDUCTION OF GRATUITY PAYMENT FOR GRATUITY FUND TO LIC, IT WAS CLAIMED IT IS ALLOWABLE U/S 36(I)(V) O F THE ACT OTHERWISE IT IS ALSO ALLOWABLE U/S 37(1) OF THE ACT AS EXPLAINED INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSES. THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE VARIOUS CASE LAWS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE L EARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES REPLY HELD THAT FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 36(I)(V) OF THE ACT, THE FUND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY. IF IT IS NOT SHOWED FOR WHAT EVER REASON THE EXPENSES UNDER THIS HEAD IS NOT ALLOWABLE AS PER SPE CIFIC PROVISION OF SECTION 36(I)(V) OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO RELIED ITA 547/JP/2012 ITO VS. M/S JAIPUR THAR GRAMIN BANK 3 UPON THE VARIOUS CASE LAWS AND HE DISALLOWED THE EXPE NSES AND ADDED BACK IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSE SSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LEARNED CIT(A ), WHO HAD ALLOWED THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF COORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2007-08 IN ITA NO. 940/ JP/2011 ORDER DATED 31/10/2011. 4. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. LEARNED D R VEHEMENTLY RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFI CER AND AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED T HE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND ALSO ARGUED THAT IN ASSESSEES O WN CASE IN ITA NO. 196/JP/2012 A.Y. 2008-09 ORDER DATED 17/10/2014, TH E HONBLE BENCH HAD CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE AND DISMISSED THE REVENUE S APPEAL ON IDENTICAL AND SIMILAR ISSUE. THEREFORE, HE PRAYED TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. THE IDENTICAL ISSUE IN ASS ESSEES OWN CASE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN A.Y. 2007-08 AND 2008-09 BY THIS BE NCH AND THE REVENUES APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED ON THIS GROUND. BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE EARLIER YEAR IN ASSESS EES OWN CASE BY THE ITA 547/JP/2012 ITO VS. M/S JAIPUR THAR GRAMIN BANK 4 COORDINATE BENCH, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) DESERVED TO BE UPHELD. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/12/2014. SD/- SD/- (R.P. TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR, DATED : 31 ST DECEMBER, 2014 * RANJAN COPY FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ITO, WARD 2(2), JAIPUR. 2. M/S JAIPUR THAR GRAMIN BANK, JAIPUR. 3. THE CIT (A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE D/R GUARD FILE (I.T.A. NO. 547/JP/2012) BY ORDER, AR ITAT JAIPUR.