2022 (7) TMI 813

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ese appeals, we proceed to dispose of them vide this common order. 3. For the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts relevant for the appeal in ITA No.1631/PUN/2018 for A.Y. 2004-05 are stated herein. 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are as under: The respondent-assessee is a co-operative bank engaged in the business of banking. The return of income for the assessment year 2004-05 was filed on 29.10.2004 declaring loss of Rs.10,53,92,979/- and against the said return of income, original assessment was completed vide order dated 28.12.2006 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act accepting the returned loss. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice u/s 148 os the Act on 28.03.2011 calling upon the respondent-assessee bank to file ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Reliance Petroproduct (P) Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC) and Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. 348 ITR 306 (SC). Being aggrieved by the decision of CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us challenging the correctness of order of CIT(A). 7. When the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice. The Sr. DR submits that the respondent-assessee bank made wrong claim deliberately knowing that it was not entitled for deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) for the assessment year prior to A.Y. 2007-08. Therefore, the respondent-assessee is clearly guilty of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 8. We have carefully gone through the material on record. On p....