2022 (2) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3-14 vide order dated 30.03.2016 u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the 'Act'). The additions made in this original assessment order was challenged by assessee before CIT(A) and the CIT(A)-1, Tiruchirappalli in ITA No.37/CIT(A)-1/TRY/2016-17, order dated 14.09.2017 allowed relief on many grounds. Subsequently, the order of CIT(A) dated 14.09.2017 was rectified by the CIT(A)-1, suo-motu vide order No.154/1/CIT(A)-1/Try/2017-18 dated 01.11.2017. Subsequently, the DCIT, Circle 2(1), Trichy moved an application of rectification u/s.154 of the Act, dated 14.12.2007 and notice u/s.154 of the Act was issued dated 12.02.2018 and the CIT(A)-1, Tiruchirapalli passed order in appeal No.154/CIT(A)- 1/Try/2018-19 dated 18.05.2018 (impug....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly in the case of depreciation on investments and the claim of deduction u/s.36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits. The ld.AR just relied on the grounds raised by the Revenue. 4. The ld.AR for assessee took us to the application moved by the AO u/s.154 of the Act requesting the CIT(A) to rectify the mistake apparent from record in the order passed by CIT(A) dated 14.09.2017 in ITA No.37/CIT(A)-1/TRY/2016-17. The ld.AR drew our attention to the following two issues:- (i). The appellant bank failed to classify the investments under HTM, AFS & HFT categories as per Reserve Bank of India guidelines and failed to set off appreciation against the depreciation thereby claiming excess depreciation. (ii). Claimed deduction u/s 36(1)(....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ents amounting to Rs. 41,80,57,696/-. The issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the assessee's own case, as reported in [2005] 273 ITR 510 (Mad) and even the SLP filed by the Department has been dismissed vide SLP No.9458/2010. The ld.AR stated that this decision has been followed by the Tribunal, Chennai Bench in assessee's own case for assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No.1497/Chny/2013 dated 28.02.2019, as reported in [2019] 72 ITR (Trib) 26. The ld.AR stated on merits that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nawanshahar Central Co-opertive Bank Ltd., [2007] 289 ITR 6 (SC), wherein the Board Circular No.18/2015 dated 02.11.2015 has clarified that the investm....