Indian Overseas Bank, CHENNAI V. ACIT LTU-2, CHENNAI

ITA 660/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4287 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: CHENNAI , , $ BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.660/CHNY/2019 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, 763, ANNASALAI, CHENNAI 600 002. [PAN: AAACI 1223J] VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU(2), CHENNAI. ( /APPELLANT) ( &'( /RESPONDENT) ( / APPELLANT BY : MR. C. NARESH, CA &'( /RESPONDENT BY : MR. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 28.09.2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.09.2021 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-17 , CHENNAI IN I.T.A NO.202/2017-18 DATED 31.01.2019 RELEVANT TO T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. I.T.A NO.660/CHNY/2019 :- 2 -: 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A BANKING COMPANY AND FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME BY DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 550,19,08,710/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY, AFTER FOLLOWING DUE PROCEDUR E ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( HEREINAFTER AS THE ACT) ON 2803.2013. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMENT W AS REOPENED U/S. 147 OF THE ACT BY ISSUED A NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE A CT ON 30.03.2016 AND ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) R/W S. 147 OF T HE ACT. 3. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE U S THAT THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE IS INVALID FOR THE REASON THAT THE A.O HAS NOT RECORDED REASONS PROPERLY AND HE HA S NOT MENTIONED THAT THERE IS NO ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME THEREFORE, TH E REOPENING IS INVALID. 4. THE LD. D.R HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SIMILAR ISSUE OF REOPENING ALREADY CAME UP BEFORE THE HONBLE ITAT C BENCH, CHENNAI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IN ITA NO.1879/CHNY/2017 DA TED 06.06.2019 AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS UPHELD THE REOPENING. THE LD. D.R HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THERE IS AN ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME AND THEREFORE, HE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE A.O AND LD. CIT(A). I.T.A NO.660/CHNY/2019 :- 3 -: 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATER IALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS GROUND IS WHETHER REOPENING IS VALID OR NOT? TO DECIDE THE ABOVE ISSUE, THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE A.O ARE EXTRACTED AS UNDER: REASONS:- IT WAS NOTICED THAT SHE ASSESSEE HAD RESERVED RS.2 09.61 CRORE (581.58 - 371.97) UNDER AGRICULTURAL DEBT WAI VER AND DEBT RELIEF SCHEME 2008 AS THIRD INSTALLMENT DURING THE YEAR THE PROVISION OF DEBT WHICH WAS ALREADY CLAIMED AND ALL OWED AS BAD DEBT THIS IS REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX.. YOU ARE REQUESTED TO FURNISH THE OBJECTION (IF ANY) BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED ON OR BEFORE 25.07.2016. 6. WE FIND FROM THE ABOVE REASONS THAT THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE A.O IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY CLAIMED AS A PROVI SION FOR DEBT AND SAME IS ALLOWED. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS RE CEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 209.61 CRORES UNDER AGRICULTURAL DEBT WAIVER AND DEBT RELIEF SCHEME, 2008. IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE AMOUNT, WH ICH IS ALREADY CLAIMED AS A BAD DEBT BY THE ASSESSEE AND AGAIN ASS ESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE SAME AMOUNT UNDER DEBT WAIVER AND DEBT RELIEF SCHEME. ACCORDING TO THE A.O, THERE IS AN ESCAPEMENT OF INC OME. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O HAS ISSUED A NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT AND COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) R/W. S. 147 OF THE ACT ON 29 .12.2017. I.T.A NO.660/CHNY/2019 :- 4 -: 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE A.O HAS CORRECTLY RECORDED THE REASONS AND REOPENED THE ASS ESSMENT AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 147 OF THE ACT THUS, THE REOPENING IS VALID. 8. SO FAR AS ANOTHER GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED, WHETHER THE AMOUNT RECEIVED UNDER AGRICULTURAL DEBT RELIEF AND DEBT WAIVER SCHEME IS TAXABLE OR NOT? 9. THE LD. COUNSEL OR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED TH AT THE SIMILAR ISSUE ALREADY CAME UP BEFORE THE HONBLE ITAT C B ENCH, CHENNAI FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2012-13 IN ITA NOS. 1879, 1880 & 1881/CHNY/2017 VIDE ORDER DATED 06.06.2019 DIRECT ED THE A.O TO RE- EXAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. F OR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER IS E XTRACTED AS UNDER: 5.5.3 WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITHER SIDE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSES SEE ADMITTEDLY RECEIVED RS.234.53 CRORES TOWARDS FIRST INSTALLMENT ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL DEBT WAIVER AND DEBT RELIEF SCHEME 200 8. THE CIT(A) FOUND THAT IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE INTEREST INCOME WOULD NOT BE OFFERED TO TAX WHEREAS THE PRINCIPAL PORTION WOULD BE INCLU DED IN THE PROVISO ACCOUNT. THEREFORE CIT(A) DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE RELEVANT INFORMATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER A ND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE MATTER. UNDER THE SCHEME OF INCOME-TAX ACT, THE CIT(A) HAS NO POWER TO SET ASID E THE ASSESSMENT FOR RECONSIDERATION. HOWEVER THIS TRIBUN AL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION, IT HAS TO BE VERIFIED WHETHER T HE INTEREST INCOME WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION EARLIER. ACCORDINGLY IN EX ERCISE OF JURISDICTION CONFERRED ON THIS TRIBUNAL, THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-E XAMINE THE MATTER I.T.A NO.660/CHNY/2019 :- 5 -: AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING REASONAB LE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 10. WE THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER P ASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE, WE DIRECT THE A.O TO RE-EXAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, THI S GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( ) (G. MANJUNATHA) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (V. DURGA RAO) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED: 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 . EDN/- /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( )/CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. /GF