Indian Overseas Bank, CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

MA 232/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7369 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Bad and doubtful debts

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] M.P.NO.232/MDS/2011 [ARISING OUT OF M.P.NO.162/MDS/2011 IN I .T.A NO. 1566/MDS/2008 ] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK 763, MOUNT ROAD CHENNAI 600 002 [ PAN AAACI 1223 J ] VS THE DY. CIT COMPANY RANGE II CHENNAI (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI C.NARESH, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.E.B RENGARAJAN, JR. STANDING COUNSEL DATE OF HEARING : 09-12-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15-12-2011 O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION HAS BEE N FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 23.9.2011 I N M.P.NO.162/MDS/2011 FILED BY THE REVENUE ARISING OU T OF I.T.A.NO.1566/MDS/2008, PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YE AR 2004-05. 2. THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION READS AS UNDER: MOST RESPECTFULLY WE SUBMIT AS UNDER: 1. THE APPELLANT A PUBLIC SECTOR BANK. THE DEPARTMENT FILED ITS APPEAL IN ITA NO 1566/MDS/08 FOR THE ASST YEAR 2004 -05 AGAINST THE ORDER OF ID CIT (A) WHEREIN THE FOLLOWING ISSUE S WERE M.P 232/11 :- 2 -: INVOLVED: A) DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON ASSETS TAKEN OVER F ROM BANK OF TAMILNADU LTD. B) DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS ARISING OUT OF FRAUDS WRITTEN OFF C) ALLOWANCE OF DOUBLE INCOME TAX RELIEF. 2. THE COMMITTEE ON DISPUTES (COD) IN THEIR MEETING DATED 19/11/2009 HELD AS UNDER: A) IN RESPECT OF THE FIRST AND SECOND ISSUES, THE REPR ESENTATIVE OF CBDT STATED THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD DECLINED PERM ISSION TO CBDT TO PURSUE SIMILAR MATTERS BEFORE ITAT ON 13.11 .2007 (ITEM NO. 14). IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE POSITION, IT DE CLINED PERMISSION TO CBDT TO PURSUE THESE ISSUES BEFORE IT A T. B) IN RESPECT OF THE THIRD ISSUE, THE COMMITTEE OBS ERVED THAT IT HAD PERMITTED THE DEPARTMENT TO PURSUE A SIMILAR MA TTER BEFORE ITA T IN TODAY'S MEETING(ITEM NO.6 ABOVE). I T, THEREFORE, PERMITTED CBDT TO PURSUE THIS ISSUE BEFORE ITAT, IN VIEW OF QUESTIONS OF FACTS AND LAW INVOLVED' 3. THE HON'BLE ITAT IN THE ORDER IN ITA 1566/MDS/08 DATED 22/01/2009 HAD ORIGINALLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILE D BY THE DEPARTMENT SINCE REQUISITE APPROVAL OF COD WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THAT POINT OF TIME. SUBSEQUENTLY IN MA. 100/MDS/201 0 DATED 13/08/2010 THE HON'BLE ITAT RECALLED THE ORIGINAL O RDER IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUE OF DOUBLE INCOME TAX RELIEF ONLY. 4. THE DEPARTMENT HAD AGAIN FILED AN MP IN MP.NO.162/MDS/2011 SEEKING PERMISSION OF THE HON'BL E TRIBUNAL TO PERMIT THE DEPARTMENT TO PURSUE THE OTH ER TWO ISSUE ALSO BASED ON THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION OF SUPREME CO URT IN THE CASE OF ELECTRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA (332 ITR 58) JUDGMENT DATED 17/02/2011. THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN THEIR OR DER DATED 23109/2011 PERMITTED THE DEPARTMENT TO PURSUE THE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE OTHER TWO ISSUES ALSO. 5. THE BANK (BHARAT OVERSEAS BANK LTD (SINCE TAKEN O VER BY INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK) HAD UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANC ES SOUGHT PERMISSION FROM THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN RESPECT OF ONE OF THE ISSUE VIZ., BAD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200607 WHERE THE COD HAD DENIED PERMISSION ON THE GROUND OF MATE RIALITY OF THE AMOUNT INVOLVED. THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN THE ORDER IN MP 151/MDS/2011 DATED 23/09/2011 IE ON THE SAME DAY WH EN M.P 232/11 :- 3 -: DEPARTMENT WAS GRANTED PERMISSION DECLINED PERMISSI ON TO THE BANK TO PURSUE THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT 'NET E FFECT OF APEX COURT DECISION, IN OUR OPINION, IS THAT ALL APPLICA TIONS PENDING BEFORE COD AS ON 11 H FEBRUARY 2011 SHALL ABATE, ALL PERMISSIONS ALREADY GRANTED AND ALL DENIAL OF PERMISSION ALREADY COMMUN ICATED WILL HAVE TO BE TAKEN COGNIZANCE AND EFFECT GIVEN'. THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER WAS COMMON IN THE BOTH THE ABOVE PE TITIONS VIZ MP NO.162/MDS/2011 AND MP 151/MDS/2011. 6. UNDER THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED THAT THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL MAY BE PLEASED TO RECTIFY THE ORDER IN MP 162/MDS/2011 BY DECLINING PERMISSION TO THE DEPARTM ENT FOR PURSUING THE ISSUES ON WHICH COD HAD DECLINED PERMI SSION TO THE DEPARTMENT BASED ON THE STAND TAKEN ON THIS ISSUE I N MP 151/MDS/2011 CITED ABOVE. 3. IN VIEW OF THE SUBSEQUENT HON'BLE SUPREME COURT S DECISION IN THE CASE OF ELECTRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. V. UNION OF INDIA (322 ITR 58), THIS BENCH HAS RECALLE D THE TRIBUNAL ORDER (SUPRA) AND THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MER IT IN THIS PETITION AND ACCORDINGLY, DISMISS THE SAME. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 5.12.2011. SD/- SD/- (N.S.SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( HARI OM MARATHA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 15 TH DECEMBER, 2011 RD COPY TO: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR