2018 (1) TMI 1544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the total income of Rs. 4,88,77,70,049/- under the normal provisions of the Act and Rs. 6,81,96,49,730/- u/s 115JB of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143 (2) was served on the assessee. The assessee filed a revised return declaring the revised income of Rs. 2,25,98,20,186/- under the normal provisions of the Act and 'nil' income u/s 115JB of the Act. Thereafter, notice u/s 142 (1) was issued and details were called for. In response thereof the authorized representative of the assessee appeared before the AO filed details and produced books of account. 3. After verification of the details, the AO determined the income of the assessee at Rs. 3,02,30,30,055/- under the normal provisions of Act and Rs. 7,11,20,58,798/-u/s 115JB of the Act, after rejecting the contention of the assessee that provisions of section 115JB is not applicable to the assessee and further making inter alia disallowance of Rs. 65,73,08,869/- deduction claimed by the assessee as broken period interest. The assessee challenged the assessment order before the CIT (A). The Ld. CIT (A) after hearing the assessee decided both the issues in favour of the assessee. The Ld. CIT (A) decided....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in its own appeal, ITA No. 3676/Mum/2012 for the A.Y. 2008-09 and the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, by following the earlier decision rendered in the assessee's own case, ITA No. 2337/Mum/2011 for the A.Y. 2006-07 decided this issue in favour of the assessee holding that provisions of section 115JB are not applicable to the assessee. The co-ordinate Bench has decided this issue in favour of the assessee holding as under:- "8. Vide ground No. 3 the assessee has agitated the application of section 115JB of the act to the case of the assessee. It has been submitted that the provisions of section 115JB are not applicable in the case of the assessee bank. The ld. A.R. has submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee in the own case of the assessee for assessment year 2006-07 vide order dated 10.04.13 passed in ITA Nos. 2337/M/2011. The co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal while dealing with the identical issue in the own case of the assessee has observed as under:- 9. Last ground of appeal is about applicability of section 115JB of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, AO found that calculation of MAT for the year under consideration was worked ou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Electricity Board (82 ITD 422) the provisions of Sec. 115JB cannot be made applicable to the appellant. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Kerala High Court in the case of Kerala State Electricity Board 9329 ITR 91). 21. We find that in the case of Kurung Thai Bank PCL in ITA No. 3390/M/90 for A.Y. 2004-05 it has been held as follows:- In view of the above discussion and following the view taken by a coordinate Bench in the case of Maharashtra State Electricity Board Vs JCIT (82ITD422), which holds that provisions of MAT cannot be applied to electricity companies for mutually similar reason we uphold the plea of the assessee. The provisions of Sec. 115JB do not apply to the assessee and as such, the AO was in error in concluding that income had escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee. The venjinitiation of reassessment Proceedings was bad in law, and we quash the same. 22. The decision of the Ld. CIT (A) is reversed and we hold that provisions of Sec. 115JB cannot be made applicable to the assessee. This ground of the assessee is dismissed. 9.3 We have perused the other orders cited by the AR of the assessee-bank. We find that issue is decided in favour of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the A.Y. 2001-02 held that the broken period interest paid by the appellant is allowable as deduction in computing the total income of the assessee. The coordinate Bench upheld that findings of the Ld. CIT (A) holding as under:_ "9. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record in the light of the decisions relied upon. Undisputedly, the Assessing Officer relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank Ltd. (supra), has disallowed assessee's claim of deduction on account of broken period interest on the reasoning that it is capital in nature. However, Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in American Express International Banking Corp. v/s CIT, [2002] 258 ITR 601 (Bom), after analyzing the concept of broken period interest held that broken period interest is allowable as revenue expenditure. While deciding so, the Hon'ble Court also held that the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank Ltd. (supra) would not apply to the facts of the assessee's case. Since, in case of Vijaya Bank Ltd. (supra), the Assessing Officer has assessed the broken period interest as interest on security under section 18 of the old Act, whereas i....