Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW WEDNESDAY, THE4H DAY OF JUNE201414TH JYAISHTA, 1936 ITA.No. 75 of 2014 () ---------------------- (AGAINST THE ORDER
/JUDGMENT
IN ITA4502013 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED1311-2013) APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT IN I.T.A: ----------------------------------- KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION I, ASWATHY, VELLAYAMBALAMTRIVANDRUM33 (PAN AA BCK1316) BY ADV. SRI.MOLLY JACOB, SC, KERALA FINANCIAL CO RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT IN I.T.A: ----------------------------------- ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE11), TRIVANDRUM PIN NO. 695 003. R BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON04 06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX ANNEX.A1: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER
FOR THE YEAR2008- 2009 DATED3112/2010 ISSUED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE1 TRIVANDRUM. ANNEX.A2: COPY OF THE ORDER
DATED203/2013 OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY MODIFYING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER
. ANNEX.A3: COPY OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. ANNEX.A4: COPY OF THE ORDER
NO. ITA NO.450/COCH/2013 DATED1311/2013 ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH. /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE. K. M. JOSEPH & K.ABRAHAM MATHEW , JJ.
========================= I.T.A. No. 75 of 2014 ========================= Dated this the 4th day of June 2014
JUDGMENT
K. M. Joseph, J.
This appeal is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The appellant is the Kerala Financial Corporation. The appellant filed its return for the assessment year 2008-2009 declaring a total loss of Rs.1,37,34,398/-. The case was selected for scrutiny. The assessing officer completed the assessment assessing a total income at Rs.45,54,15,830/-. In the appeal filed by the appellant before the Commissioner, partial relief was granted. Being aggrieved by the said order to the extent the same confirmed the additions, the appellant preferred further appeal. In that appeal, the Tribunal remanded the matter back for consideration. The main issue with which we are concerned is the additions made in respect of OTS collection and revenue recovery collection. In respect of these two items, the matter was remanded to the authorities below. Following are the findings which we noticed at I.T.A. No.75/2014 2 paragraph 4.3. of the order of the Tribunal: "4.3.We notice that the tax authorities have not examined the above said submissions made by the assessee. In our view, the assessee has explained the circumstances under which it had agreed to the proposal of the assessing officer to assess the amount available in Suspense account. According to the assessee, the situation has changed in the instant year and it would be in a position to explain each receipt with the documents pertaining to the concerned borrower. Under these set of fats, in our view, it may not be proper to assess the entire collections simply for the reason that in the earlier years, the assessee has agreed for the assessment of the amount available in Suspense account. In our view, the assessing officer is obliged to consider the explanations of the assessee with reference to the terms and conditions relating to the concerned borrower and I.T.A. No.75/2014 3 then only, in our view, he would be in a position to determine about the tax ability of these receipts. Admittedly, this exercise has not been carried out by the assessing officer. Before us, the assessee has furnished copies of Recovery policy 2007 - 08, which lists out the terms and conditions relating to OTS scheme, which also requires to be considered by the AO. In the absence of basic fact relating to these receipts we are also not in a position to express any opinion. Accordingly, in our view this issue requires fresh examination at the end of the assessing officer. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT (A) on this issue and restore the same to the file of the assessing officer with the direction to examine the nature of each of the receipts accounted under these two heads with reference to the relevant documents and take appropriate decision in accordance with the law. " 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant I.T.A. No.75/2014 4 and the learned counsel for the Revenue.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant would point out that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the appellant by virtue of the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Haryana Financial Corporation (2012) 340 ITR288 P & H) .
4. We find that this a case where actually the Tribunal has not rendered finding in view of non availability of materials before it and the assessing authority has been directed to re do the matter. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason to consider this matter. We only make it clear that when the matter is re-done pursuant to the remand, the authority will also consider the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harayana Financial Corporation(cited supra). Subject to the same the appeal is disposed of. Sd/- K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/- K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, JUDGE dpk. /True copy/ P.S to Judge. I.T.A. No.75/2014 5