Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Kalaburagi vs M/s Krishna Grameen Bank , Gulbarga

This Income Tax Appellate Tribunal case concerns the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s. Krishna Grameen Bank for the assessment year 2012-2013. The appeal challenges the Commissioner's (Appeals) decision to allow the bank's claim for amortisation of expenditure on investments held to maturity. The department argued this was not a revenue expenditure, but the Commissioner (Appeals) relied on previous tribunal rulings.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCHES “A”, BANGALORE

Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM
ITA No.1189/Bang/2018 : Asst.Year 2012-2013

The Asst.Commissioner of Incometax,
Circle – 1, Balaburagi. 
(Appellant) 

vs.

M/s.Krishna Grameen Bank
Head Office – Kusanoor Road,
B.B.No.4, Gulbarga
Karnataka – 585 105.
PAN : AAGFK6964K.
(Respondent)

Appellant by : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Respondent by : Smt.Shettal, Advocate
Date of Hearing : 14.12.2020
Date of Pronouncement : 15.12.2020

O R D E R

Per George George K, JM

This appeal at the instance of the Department is directedagainst CIT(A)’s order dated 31.01.2018. The relevantassessment year is 2012-2013.

2. The grounds raised read as follow:-

“1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is opposed to law and facts of the case.

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO disallowed the expenditure claimed by the assessee in the P&L account under the head of amortisation as the same could not partake the character of revenue expenditure, since this amount was incurred fully at the time of SLR investment HELD TO MATURITY (HTM).

3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A), has erred in giving relief to the assessee considering the decision of ITAT, Bangalore in the assessee’s own case for theAssessment Year 2007-08 & 2009-10, while the same issues are pending before the Hon’ble High Court for adjudication.

4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that amortisation of premium paid on Government securities in an allowable expenditure ignoring the para 29vi) of CBDT Instruction no.17 of 2008 dated 26.11.2008.

To know more in details find the attachment file