TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (4) TMI 33
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ties are in the nature of capital assets. Amortization of premium on HTM Securities is not allowable under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961, as all capital assets are to be valued at cost only and no part thereof can be claimed as revenue expenditure in computing total income. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 29-11-2010 the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) upheld the findings of the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Now the assessee is in second appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the asssessee. Therefore, the appeals are being decided on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative. 5. Shri Hitendra Ninawe representing the Department vehemently supported the findings of the CIT(A) on the issue. The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that earlier this issue had travelled upto the Tribunal in the impugned assessment year in ITA No.1894/PN/2012. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the file of the AO vide order dated 04-11-2013 to decide it afresh on merits. In the second round, the AO made disallowance of Rs. 15,1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rein the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under: " 4. We have heard the parties. We find that the issue before us is clearly covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Latur Urban Co-op. Bank Ltd. in ITA No. 778 and 792/PN/2011, order dated 31-8-2012. The relevant discussion and finding of the Tribunal on the issue is as under. "13. So far as Ground No. 2 is concerned, it is in respect of the disallowances on the loss on sale of surplus of Rs. 14,70,000/-. The A.O has observed that an amount of Rs. 14,70,000/- is debited to the Profit & Loss A/c on account of loss on sale of securities. The A.O has further observed that the assessee in its submission has stated that securities of the Bank are held under the head "to maturity category" and, therefore, loss arising on the sale of investment is in the nature of capital loss and therefore, the same is not allowable expenditure. The A.O made the addition to the extent of Rs. 14,70,000/-. The Ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition. 14. We have heard the parties. The Ld Counsel placed his heavy reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble High....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of National Co-op. Bank Ltd. Vs. Jt. CIT Range 3 Bangalore (ITA No. 1090/Bang/2010 and 7/Bang/2011, order dated 11-5-2012). We therefore set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and allow the claim of the assessee." 2.1 Facts being similar, so following the same reasoning, we hold that amortization premium paid on Govt. Securities of Rs. 23,13,525/- debited to Profit and Loss Account, as per RBI guidelines has to be allowed being expenses incurred during the course of business of banking, Assessing Officer is directed accordingly." 19. The issue arising before us is similar to the issue before the Tribunal in assessee's own case in assessment year 2009-10 and following the same parity of reasoning, we uphold the order of CIT(A) in allowing the deduction on account of amortization premium paid on Government securities. The grounds of appeal Nos.1 to 8 raised by the Revenue are thus, dismissed." 23. We find that the Tribunal had allowed the claim of the assessee, wherein, in turn, relying the order of the Tribunal in Nagar Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. (supra). Following the same parity of reas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resented the unclaimed cheques at the end of the financial year. The CIT(A) has confirmed the addition only in respect of unclaimed amount which is barred by limitation. The Ld. Departmental Representative supported the findings of the CIT(A) on the issue. The Ld. Departmental Representative further pointed out that the issue raised in present appeal has been considered by the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No.1861/PN/2013 for A.Y. 2010-11 decided on 20-05-2015. 12. We have heard the submissions made by Ld. Departmental Representative and have perused the orders of the authorities below. We have also considered the order of Tribunal in ITA No.1861/PN/2013. We find that the issue raised in the present appeal is identical to the issue raised by assessee in aforesaid appeal for A.Y. 2010-11. The Tribunal decided the issue in favour of the assessee with the following observations : "11. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the addition confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of unclaimed liability of Rs. 29,58,672/-. As pointed out by us in paras hereinabove, the said liability was on account of unclaimed DDs issued by the Bank, which were not presented in t....