Asstt.Commissioner of Income Tax ., Belgaum v. The Belgaum Dist. Central Co. Opp. Bank., Belgaum

ITA 27/PAN/2012 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2014 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 2724114 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AAAAB0839M
Bench Panaji
Appeal Number ITA 27/PAN/2012
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant Asstt.Commissioner of Income Tax ., Belgaum
Respondent The Belgaum Dist. Central Co. Opp. Bank., Belgaum
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 14-11-2014
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 14-11-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 16-10-2014
Next Hearing Date 16-10-2014
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 27-02-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE S/SHRI P.K.BANSAL (AM) AND D.T.GARASIA (JM) I.T.A. NO.2 7/PAN/2012: ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 2009 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 2 BELGAUM. VS. THE BELGAUM DISTRICT CENTRAL CO.OP. BANK LIMITED. NO.1 OLD P.B. ROAD NEAR CENTRAL BUS STAND BELGAUM. PA NO.AAAAB 0839 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT I.T.A. NO.27/PAN/20C.O. NO.09/PNJ/2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.27/PNJ/2012: ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 2009) THE BELGAUM DISTRICT CENTRAL CO.OP. BANK LIMITED. NO.1 OLD P.B. ROAD NEAR CENTRAL BUS STAND BELGAUM. PA NO.AAAAB 0839 M VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 2 BELGAUM. CROSS OBJECTOR RESPONDENT FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI NISHANT K FOR T HE CROSS OBJECTOR : SHRI A.T.KULKARNI ADV. DATE OF HEARING: 29.9.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14 /11/2014 ORDER PER D.T.GARASIA JM THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER DATED 30.11.2011 OF LD CIT(A) BELGAUM FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. THE AS SESSEE HAS ALSO FILED CROSS OBJECTION IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A). 2. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: (1) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN SECTION 250 IN PARTICULARLY SUB - SECTIONS (1) AND ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER WITHOUT GIVING NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THEREFORE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) IS BAD IN LAW AND REQUIRES TO BE SET ASIDE. (2) THE LEARNED CIT(APP EALS) ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER EITHER IN PERSON OR BY A REPRESENTATIVE AS PER SECTION 250(2) OF THE L.T. ACT: 1961 AND THEREFORE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) IS BAD IN LAW AND REQUIRES TO BE SET ASIDE . 2 I.T.A. NO.27/PAN/2012: ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 2009 (3) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DEPRIVING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO AVAIL RIGHT TO BE HEARD AT THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL AS ENVISAGED IN SECTION 250(2) (B) WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY HIM VIDE HIS LETTER F.NO. CIT(A)/BGM/ORDERS/11 - 12 DATED 11.01.2012 AND AS SUCH THE ORDER PASSED LACKS PROCEDURAL ASPECT AS WELL AS INVALID IN THE EYES OF LAW. (4) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE (A) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE U /S 40(A)(IA) OF RS.15 85 63 630 IGNORING THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF PUNE TAT IN THE CASE OF BHAGINI NIVEDITO SAHAKARI BANK LTD V. ACIT 87 LTD 569. (B) THE EARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2609 98 525 ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON LOANS WHICH ARE CLASSIFIED AS NON - PERFORMING ASS ETS WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE V. CII 158 [FR 102 AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE NEW PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43 D (C) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT SEC TION - 43D WAS INSERTED TO OVER COME THE DECI SION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN STATE BANK OF TRAVONCORE V. CIT AND THE BENEFIT OF THE EXCEPTION FROM THE SAID DECISION OF THE HONBRE SUPREME COURT WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. (D) THE EARNED CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED AND SECTION 145 OF THE L.T. ACT 1961. 2. THIS IS A RECALLED MATTER. EARLIER THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE WERE FI XED FOR HEARING ON 18.4.2012 AND THE TRIBUNAL DECIDED THE MATTER EXPARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF SUBMISSION OF LD D.R. AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A) TO DECIDE AFRESH. HOWEVER THE MATTER WAS RECALLED BY THE TRIBUNAL AS THERE WA S REASONABLE CAUSE OF NON - APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. HENCE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US FOR ADJUDICATION. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD D.R. CONTENDED THAT LD CIT(A) HAS NOT AFFORDED REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO LD A.R. AT THE TIME OF FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. HENCE THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD CIT(A). 4. ON THE OTHER HAND LD A.R. OPPOSED TO THE CONTENTION OF LD D.R. FOR REMITTI NG THE MAT TER BACK TO LD CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD LD REPRESENTATIVES OF PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD OF THE CASE. ON PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WE OBSERVE THAT AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE LD CIT(A) THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT PRESENT. THEREFORE LD CIT(A) DECIDED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE 3 I.T.A. NO.27/PAN/2012: ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 2009 ASSESSEE EXPARTE WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS VIEW. BEFORE US THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED A LETTER NO.CIT(A)/BEM/ORDERS/11.12 DATED 11 TH JANUARY 2012 WHEREIN IT WAS INTER ALIA STATED BY LD CIT(A) BELGAUM AS UNDER: THOUGH THE HEARINGS WERE TAKEN PLACE TWO TO THREE TIMES BUT ALL THE TIMES HEARINGS WERE NOT TAKEN IN BELGAUM. IN SOME CASES THE ARS AND ADVOCATES CAME TO HUBLI AND THE HEARINGS WERE TAKING PLACE. THIS IS ONE OF THE REASON FOR NOT INVOLVING THE AOS AS HUBLI IS ALMOST 100 KMS AWAY FROM BELGAUM. FROM THE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF LD CIT(A) BELGAUM IT IS TRANSPIRED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT INVOLVED AT THE TIME OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND LD CIT(A) PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER WITHOUT HEARING LD A. O . IN VIEW OF THIS AND IN ORDER TO IMPART SUBSTANTIAL J USTICE TO THE REVENUE A S WELL AS ALSO ASSESSEE WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION OF THE APPEAL AFTER GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITIES TO BOTH THE SIDES. 6. IN THE RESULT APPEAL F ILED BY THE REVEN UE AND CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNC ED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 4 /11/2014 S D / - S D / - (P.K.BANSAL) (D.T.GARASIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED PANAJI 1 4 /11/2014 B.K.PARIDA SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE : 2. THE REVENUE:DCIT CIRCLE - 2 BELGAUM 3. THE CIT BELGAUM 4. THE CIT(A) BELGAUM 5. DR PANAJI BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT PANAJI