TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 2178
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt. 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,13,80,453/- made by the AO holding that the interest due on 'Non-Performing Assets' was taxable as the Co-op. Bank was following mercantile system of Accounting except with regard to the interest pertaining to NPAs. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in relying on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of M/s. The Jalandhar Central Co-op Bank Ltd., vide order dated 20.01.2017 in ITA No. 604, 605,652/Asr/2015-16 as the Department has filed appeal against the said order before the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court which is still pending for adjudication. 3. That on the facts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. Kapurthala, order dated 14.07.2017 dealt with the similar and identical issue qua 'Non Performing Assets'. The Relevant part of this order is reproduced herein below. "8. We have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case and also cases relied on the parties as interest in the instant case the only controversy pertains to deletion of the addition qua interest due on non performing assets as not taxable and the interest on non performing assets is to be taxed in the year of actual receipt even though it is following mercantile system of accounting. The Coordinate Bench of the ITAT, while deciding the similar issue observed as under: "6. It remains an undisputed fact that the assessee co-ordination bank has been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9.2015, the assessee had stated that the assessee had been confirmed by the Headquarter of the Punjab State Co-operative Bank, to be a scheduled bank. This position has not been disputed. 9. In view of the above, we find that the grievance of the department is without any force. The order of the Id. CIT(A) is a well versed reasoned detailed order, requiring no interference whatsoever at our hands. The same is, accordingly, confirmed. 10. As noted at the beginning of this order, all the three appeals involve the same common issue. That being so, our above observations shall apply equally, mutatis mutandis, to the other two appeals also. 11.Accordingly, all the orders of the Id. CIT(A) in these three appeals are uph....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wing the decision of Co-ordinate Bench at Amritsar (Jalandhar Camp) in the case of DCIT v. Punjab Gramin Bank Kapurthala in ITA No.134(Asr)/2015, vide order dated 22.06.2016 deleted the addition of Rs. 8,50,000/- qua disallowance of provision for Standard Assets. The concluding part of the order is reproduced herein below. "8. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material on record. We find that the assessee had created a provision of Rs.50,00,000/- which included a sum of Rs. 13,25,000/- as provisions for bad and doubtful debts and the balance amount of Rs.36,75,000/- was provision against standard assets and the entire amount was claimed as deduction under section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. The Assessing Officer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mount of such assets shown in the books of account of the bank on the last day of the previous year: Provided further that for the relevant assessment years commencing on or after the 1st day of April,2003 and ending before the 1st day of April, 2005, the provisions of the first proviso shall have effect as if for the words "five percent", the words "ten percent" had been substituted: Provided also that a scheduled bank or a non-scheduled bank referred to in this sub-clause shall, at its option, be allowed a further deduction in excess of the limits specified in the foregoing provisions, for an amount not exceeding the income derived from redemption of securities in accordance with a scheme framed by the Central Government....