Ita/1281/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.state Bank Of Travancore,Poojappura

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 ITA.No. 1281 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.760/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT ------------------------ M/S.STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) FOR R THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, &BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I. T. A. No. 1281 of 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. When the appeal is taken up for hearing counsel appearing for therespondent-Bank submitted that Committee on Disputes' approval isnot obtained by the revenue to file appeal against the assessee, which isa public sector undertaking. However, standing counsel appearing forthe revenue produced a copy of Constitution Bench judgment of theSupreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1883 of 2011 whereunder theSupreme Court has declared the requirement of approval by CoD forfiling appeal as unnecessary. In this case question may arise as towhether the judgment of the Supreme Court applies only prospectivelyor not. However, in this case we do not think there is any need toconsider the same because CoD approval is already obtained by therevenue for filing appeal. Consequently we proceeded to hear theappeal on merits. 2. The only question raised is in regard to validity of addition of ITA 1281/2009 proportionate expenditure attributable to exempted income in thecourse of completion of book profit assessment under Section 115JAof the I.T. Act. While hearing another appeal filed against similarassessment of another bank, we have considered the issue and in thatjudgment we remanded the matter to the assessing officer tospecifically consider the disallowance with reference to sub-clause (f)of Explanation to Section 115JA which was not considered by theassessing officer in that case. However, in this case, disallowance isspecifically made with reference to the above provision, which is onlyRs. 1 crore. Therefore following the judgment in I.T.A.Nos. 1758,1772 and 1778 of 2009 we allow the appeal filed by the revenue byreversing the order of the Tribunal and restoring the order of the firstappellate authority confirming the disallowance to the above extent. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge.Judge. (BHABANI PRASAD RAY) Judge.