AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 812
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itions and determining the Total Income at Rs. 1701,59,47,399/- under the normal provisions of the Act and Rs.1570,90,75,592/- u/s 115JB of the Act. On the basis of the examination of the records, a notice u/s 263 dated 04-02-2020 and 12.03.2020 was issued on the Appellant bank and the same was served on 11.02.2020 and 13.03.2020 respectively. In the said notice, it was alleged that the order of the learned Assessing Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in respect of the following items: 1. Interest on Non Performing Assets. 2. Deferred payment receipt of guarantee commission. 3. Loss on sale of assets to ARC. 4. Interest on Perpetual Bonds. 5 Provision and Contingency (Provision for NPA) treatment while computing Book Profit. The Appellant bank gave a detailed reply to the said notice. Disregarding the contentions of the Appellant bank, the learned Pr. CIT passed the impugned order holding that the Assessment order dated 21-12-2018 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue due to lack of enquiry under Explanation 2 to section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and set aside the same, with a direction to the learned Asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot claim any loss on assets sold to ARC. 4.3. The learned Pr. CIT erred in relying on irrelevant records to remand the issue to the learned Assessing Officer. 5. The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that the Assessment order is erroneous on the issue of interest on perpetual bonds. 5.1. The learned Pr. CIT failed to appreciate the fact that the interest on perpetual bonds is an allowable expenditure. 5.2. The learned Pr. CIT traversed beyond the Show Cause Notice in remanding the issue to the lamed Assessing Officer. 6. The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding at the Assessment order is erroneous on the issue of addition of Provisions & Contingencies to the Book Profits computed u/s 115JB. 6.1 The learned Pr. CIT failed to appreciate the fact that there seen in the order since The learned Assessing Officer has added the entire Provisions & Contingencies debited to Profit & Loss Account while computing the Book. 6.2. The learned Pr. CIT failed to appreciate the fact that the NPA provision is added back since it is part of the Provisions & Contingences added by the learned Assessing Officer while computing the Book Profit u/s 115JB. 6.3. Without prejudice to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Assessing Officer to modify the order dated 19-02-2019 passed u/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Your appellants submit that the order of the Pr. CIT is illegal, bad in law and void and the same ought to be quashed. 1.1. The learned Pr. CIT erred in holding that there was a lack of enquiry under Explanation 2 to section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.2 The appellants submit that the order of the AO is not erroneous and is not prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Your appellants therefore suit that the order of the Pr. CIT be quashed. 1.3. The learned Pt. CIT failed to appreciate the fact that in respect of all the issues, the learned Assessing Officer has adopted one of the possible views. 1.4. Without prejudice to the above, the learned Pr.CIT erred in remanding the matter for further verification. 2. The learned Pr.CIT erred in holding that the provisions of section 43D r.w.r. 6EA applies to Non Performing Assets (NPA) which are more than 180 days. 2.1. The learned Pr. CIT failed to appreciate the fact that the Rule 6EA applies to all NPAs even if they are less than 180 days. 2.2. The learned Pr CIT failed to appreciate the fact that the intere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons of section 115JB are not applicable to Nationalized Banks." 04. We first take the facts for A.Y. 2016-17 and reach at a decision, which would be applied in deciding appeal for A.Y. 2017-18, as the facts in both the cases are identical. 05. The facts for A.Y. 2016-17 shows that assessee, Vijaya bank, is a public sector banking company, it filed its return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 on 14th October, 2016 at a loss of Rs. 439,78,41,996/-. The return was picked up for scrutiny, the assessment under section 143 (3) of the Act was passed on 21st December, 2018 wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 1701,59,47,399/-. 06. On examination of the records, the learned PCIT found that the assessment order dated 21ST December, 2018, passed by the learned Assessing Officer is erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue by issue of show cause notice dated 4th February, 2020. The learned PCIT was of the view that the assessing officer has not made any enquiry with regard to the (1) interest on non-performing assets (2) deferred payment receipt on guarantee commission. He further noted that the assessee has debited loss on sale of assets to an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....econstruction company, (4) interest on perpetual bonds and (5) the computation of book profit under section 115 JB of the Act. The learned PCIT passed the order under section 263 of the Act on 31st March, 2021. 09. The assessee is aggrieved with that order and therefore is in appeal before us. The learned authorized representative submitted that on identical issue the notice under section 263 of the Act was issued in case of Dena Bank which is also now merged with Bank of Baroda in the learned PCIT held that the order passed by the learned assessing officer is erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. This order of the learned PCIT travelled up to the coordinate bench in ITA No.1685/Mum/2020, wherein the coordinate bench has allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that the PCIT has exceeded his jurisdiction in exercising the revisionary powers under section 263 of the Act. He specifically referred to the issues at paragraph number 2 of that order wherein the issue with respect to interest on non-performing assets, deferred payment receipt of guarantee commission, loss on sale of assets to assets reconstruction company and interest paid on perpetual bonds w....