Tribunal allows assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, dismisses revenue's appeal on various additions.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, directing verification of PTU's exemption status. The revenue's appeal was dismissed, upholding deletion of additions for leave encashment provisions and interest accrued, as well as the provision for bad and doubtful debts against standard assets.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of interest paid to I.K.G Punjab Technical University under Sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.
2. Addition on account of provision for leave encashment and interest accrued on Group Insurance Leave Encashment Policy.
3. Disallowance of provision for bad and doubtful debts made against standard assets under Sec. 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Interest Paid to I.K.G Punjab Technical University:
The assessee bank paid interest of Rs. 2,45,58,987/- to PTU without deducting TDS, based on PTU's claim of exemption under Sec. 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Income Tax Act. The AO disallowed this amount under Sec. 40(a)(ia), arguing PTU was not wholly or substantially financed by the government, and thus not exempt. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, stating the Income Tax Act requires a certificate for non-deduction of TDS. However, the Tribunal found that the CBDT Circular No. 4/2002 exempts certain institutions from TDS if their income is exempt and they are not required to file returns. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO to verify PTU's exemption status under Sec. 10(23C)(iiiab) and consider the second proviso to Sec. 40(a)(ia) if PTU had filed a return and paid tax on the interest income.

2. Addition on Account of Provision for Leave Encashment and Interest Accrued on Group Insurance Leave Encashment Policy:
The AO added Rs. 1,99,19,242/- for leave encashment provision and interest accrued on investments, allowing only actual payments to employees. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, allowing the premium paid for the Group Insurance Leave Encashment Policy under Sec. 37(1) and rejecting the addition of accrued interest as it was reinvested in the policy. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A), citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Bharat Earth Movers and the Kerala High Court's decision in Hindustan Latex Ltd., confirming that the premium paid was an allowable expense and the accrued interest should not be added to income as it was reinvested.

3. Disallowance of Provision for Bad and Doubtful Debts Made Against Standard Assets:
The AO disallowed Rs. 3,53,47,000/- for provision against standard assets, treating it as a contingent liability. The CIT(A) deleted this disallowance, following the Tribunal's decision in the assessee’s case for A.Y. 2008-09, which allowed such provisions under Sec. 36(1)(viia). The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, reiterating that Sec. 36(1)(viia) does not differentiate between provisions for bad debts and standard assets, and allows deductions for anticipated defaults on loans, including standard assets.

Conclusion:
The assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, directing the AO to verify PTU's exemption status. The revenue's appeal was dismissed, upholding the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions for leave encashment provisions and interest accrued, as well as the provision for bad and doubtful debts against standard assets.

---