Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala v. State Bank Of Patiala

ITA no. 64 of 2009 (O&M)and connected case1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH 1. ITA no. 64 of 2009 (O&M) Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala Versus ....Appellant State Bank of Patiala ...Respondent 2. ITA no. 66 of 2009 (O&M) Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala Versus ....Appellant State Bank of Patiala ...Respondent Date of Decision : 09.04.2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICK MAHESH GROVERHON'BLE MR JUSTICE LALIT BATRA Present: Mr. Kunal Sharma, Advocate, Sr. Standing counselfor Income Tax Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Sr. Advocate withMr. Amit Parsad, Advocate for Bank MAHESH GROVER, J.(QRAL) By this order we will dispose of two appeals bearing ITA Nos. 64 and 66 of 2009. | The matter pertains to the assessment year 2001-02, 2002-03, The issue arose because of the disallowance of annual unquoted securities by ITA no. 64 of 2009 (O&M)and connected case2 Yield to Maturity method (hereinafter referred to as "YIM method’) as recommended by RBI. The assessment order for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2006-07 made an alteration in the issue on the question of the YT'M method. Theissue was decided by the Appellate Tribunal in favour of the assessee Bankand no further appeal on the issue against the order of CIT(A) was filedbefore the Tribunal by the Department/Revenue, thereby orders of theTribunal dated 8.12.2008, 11.22.2009, 24.3.2009 and 31.3.2009 attainedfinality. Subsequently, the assessing officer for the assessing year 2007-08and 2008-09 granted the relief to the assessee Bank by accepting the standon the issue in question. This was in tune with the earlier orders referred to.This Court vide its judgment rendered in ITA No. 244 of 2016 titled asPrincipal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. State Bank of Patialadecided on 30.1.2017 reported as (2017)391 ITR 218 (P&H) has settled theissue with regard to the disallowance under Section 14-A of the Act onsecurities held as stock in trade. This order stand affirmed by the Hon'bleSupreme Court in the case ofMaxopp Investment Ltd. vs. Commissionerof Income Tax, New Delhi (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). In view of above, nothing survives in the present appeals whichare disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (Mahesh Grover) Judge 09.04.2019rekhaWhether speaking/reasonedWhether reportable Yes/NoYes/No (Lalit Batra) Judge