Punjab National Bank,, v. Addl CIT, Range-14,,

ITA 2223/DEL/2004 | 2001-2002
Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 222320114 RSA 2004
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2223/DEL/2004
Duration Of Justice 6 year(s) 8 month(s)
Appellant Punjab National Bank,,
Respondent Addl CIT, Range-14,,
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 07-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 07-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 21-12-2010
Next Hearing Date 21-12-2010
Assessment Year 2001-2002
Appeal Filed On 07-05-2004
Judgment Text
I.T.A. NO.2223 /DEL/04 1/4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH A NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2223/DEL/2004 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 ASSISTANT MANAGER CIT(A) PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK CIRCLE-XVII HO 5-SANSAD MARG NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. V. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K. SAMPATH ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ASHOK PANDEY CIT-DR ORDER PER A.K. GARODIA AM: THIS IS AN ASSESSEE'S APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A)- XVII NEW DELHI DATED 26.3.2004 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 01-02. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE ORDER IS AGAINST THE LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE . 2. THAT THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ADDING TO THE TAXABLE INCOME AN AMOUNT OF `.43 72 025/-. INCOME FROM THESE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS IS COVERED U/S 10(23G). IT IS PR AYED THAT THE ADDITION OF `.43 72 025/- BEING UNWARRANTED BE DELETED. 3. THAT THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ESTIMATING THE EXPENDITURE ATTRIBUTABLE TO EXEMPT INCOME @ 10% OF THE TOTAL EX EMPT . I.T.A. NO.2223/DEL/04 2/4 INCOME. IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ADDITIONS BEING UNWARRA NTED BE DELETED. 4. THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE INDEPENDENT AND WITH OUT PREJUDICE TO ONE ANOTHER. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT GRO UND NO.1 & 4 ARE GENERAL. REGARDING GROUND NO.2 IT WAS SUBMIT TED THAT STILL NOW THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO PRODUCE ANY APP ROVAL OR ANY NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL GOVT. NOTIFYING SUC H INSTITUTION AS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23G) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. IT WAS FAIRLY CONCEDED BY HIM THAT UNDER THIS FACTUAL POSITI ON GROUND NO.2 OF THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE REJECTED. ACCORDINGLY GROU ND NO.2 OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 4. REGARDING GROUND NO.3 IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ON SIM ILAR ISSUE IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-00 AS PER I.T.A. NO.4941/DEL/2002 DATED 24.3.2006 THE MATTER HAS BEE N RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRESH DECISIO N. HE SUBMITTED A COPY OF THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION AND DRAWN OUR ATTENTIO N TO PAGE NO.13 & 14 OF THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION IS IN LINE WITH THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF GODREJ BOYCE MFG. LTD. V. DCIT AS REPORTE D IN 234 CTR 1 . 5. AS AGAINST THIS LD DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED BY HIM THAT THI S MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRESH DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF THIS JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH CO URT. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE GONE T HROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE JUDGMENTS CITED BY THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-00 SIMI LAR ISSUE . I.T.A. NO.2223/DEL/04 3/4 WAS RESTORED BACK BY THE TRIBUNAL TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRESH DECISION. IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THAT YEAR THAT ENTIRE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE BANK WHICH WAS MAIN LY INCLUSIVE OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON RUNNING ITS VARIOUS BR ANCHES CANNOT BE CONSIDERED FOR MAKING PROPORTIONATE DISALLOWANCE U/S 1 4A AND ONLY THOSE EXPENDITURE WHICH ARE DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE FO R MAKING CORRESPONDING INVESTMENT CAN BE CONSIDERED AS EXPENDITU RE INCURRED IN RELATION TO EXEMPT INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKI NG DISALLOWANCE ON PRO RATA BASIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 14A OF TH E ACT. NOW WE HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE SUBSEQUENT JUDGMENT OF HON'BL E BOMBAY HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF GODREJ BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. (SUPRA) AND HENCE WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSU E AND RESTORE BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER F OR A FRESH DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF THIS JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIG H COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF GODREJ BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. (SUPRA). THE A SSESSING OFFICER SHOULD PASS NECESSARY ORDER AS PER LAW AS PER ABOVE DISCU SSION AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH JANUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (I.P. BANSAL) (A.K. GARO DIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. 7 .1.2011. HMS . I.T.A. NO.2223/DEL/04 4/4 COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)- NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR ITAT LOKNAYAK BHAWAN KHAN MARKET NEW DEL HI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER (ITAT NEW DELHI).