TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 724
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... aside the order dated 23rd March 2009 passed by the Appellant invoking his powers under section 263 of the Act. 2. Mr Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant / Revenue submitted that the ITAT has totally misdirected itself in setting aside the order passed by the Appellant under section 263 of the Act. According to Mr Suresh Kumar, it was noticed by the Appellant that a sum of Rs. 87.11 lakhs had been wrongly debited to the profit and loss account by the Assessee as a loss on account of transfer of securities held under the category "Available for Sale" to "Held to Maturity" which was allowed by the Assessing Officer in his Assessment Order dated 28th February 2007. Since such an allowance of a notional loss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aka Bank Ltd. v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2013) 356 ITR 549. We will analyse these two judgments later, after we advert to the facts in the present case. 4. The facts stated briefly are that the Assessee Bank, being a Public Limited Company, filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2005- 06 on 29th October 2005 declaring a total income of Rs. 9,10,41,00,000/-. The said assessment was selected for scrutiny and after the requisite notices were issued to the Assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and passed his Assessment Order under section 143(3) on 28th February, 2007 determining the total income of the Assessee at Rs. 12,27,85,00,000/-. 5. Subsequently it was noticed by the Appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut going into the jurisdictional issue. We find that the ITAT, after examining the entire factual matrix of the matter and after relying upon its own judgments in the case of State Bank of Mysore v/s DCIT, reported in 33 SOT 7 (Bang) and ACIT v/s Vijaya Bank, rendered in Income Tax Appeal No.253/BANG/2007 dated 24th January 2008 as well as the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Karnataka Bank Ltd. (supra), held that the claim of the Assessee for the loss of Rs. 87.11 lakhs on the transfer of securities from the category "Available for Sale" to "Held to Maturity" was an allowable deduction, and therefore set aside the order passed by the Appellant under section 263 of the Act. Being aggrieved by this order, the Revenue is in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order of the CIT (Appeals) carried the matter further to the Tribunal who confirmed the order of the CIT (Appeals). In view thereof, the Revenue approached this Court by way of a reference. On these facts, the question of law framed by this Court was as follows :- "(A) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction on account of depreciation in the value of investments and, consequently, debiting disallowance of Rs. 11,82,35,007 ?" 8. This Court, in answering the aforesaid question of law in favour of the Assessee and placing reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank v/s CIT, reported in (1999) 240 ITR 355(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... categories as mandated by the RBI Master Circular dated 1st September 2003. The Assessee treated such securities as stock-intrade and claimed depreciation on the book value after valuing the securities at cost or market value whichever was lower. The Revenue refused to accept the Assessee's plea for the deduction and disallowed the same and added back to the total income the said amount. Aggrieved by the said order, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the CIT (Appeals). The same was dismissed upholding the contention of the Assessing Authority. Aggrieved thereby, the Assessee preferred an Appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal inter alia held that since the securities on which the depreciation had been claimed on the earlier years ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te altogether in different fields. The question whether the assessee is entitled to particular deduction or not will depend upon the provision of law relating thereto and not the way, in which the entries are made in the books of account. It is not decisive or conclusive in the matter. For the purpose of the Income Tax Act whichever method is adopted by the assessee, a true picture of the profits and gains, i.e. real income is to be disclosed. For determining the real income, the entries in the balancesheet is required to be maintained in the statutory form may not be decisive or conclusive. It is open to the Income Tax Officer as well as the assessee to point out true and proper income while submitting the income tax returns. Even if the a....