O/TAXAP/321/2015 ORDER IN HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 321 of 2015 With TAX APPEAL NO. 322 of 2015 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant(s) Versus CO-OPERATIVE BANK OF RAJKOT LTD Opponent(s) Appearance: MR PRANAV G. DESAI, ADVOCATE for Appellant(s) No. 1 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA Date : 04/05/2015 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1.00. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with impugned judgment and order passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot in ITA No.914/RJT/2010 (for A.Y. 2007-2008) as well as in ITA No.349/RJT/2011 (for A.Y. 2007- 2008), appellant revenue has preferred both these Tax Appeals with following proposed substantial questions of law :- TAX APPEAL No.321 of 2015 Proposed substantial questions of law :- Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ITAT is justified in allowing Rs.68,25,000/- being amortization of premium paid on investments under held to maturity category holding Page 1 of 3 O/TAXAP/321/2015 ORDER that same is revenue expenditure in nature? TAX APPEAL No.322 of 2015 Proposed substantial questions of law :- Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ITAT is justified in allowing Rs.68,98,000/- being amortization of premium paid on investments under held to maturity category holding that same is revenue expenditure in nature? 2.00. We have heard Mr.Pranav Desai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of revenue. 2.01. It is undisputed that as such, so far as this Court is concerned, issue raised in present tax appeal is concluded against revenue and in favour of assessee. identical question came to be considered by Division Bench of this Court in case of Rajkot Dist.Co-op. Bank Ltd. and considering paragraph (vii) of CBDT Circular No.17 of 2008, it is held that assessee is entitled to amortization of security premium, as claimed. Mr.Desai, learned counsel appearing for revenue is not in position to point out any contrary decision to aforesaid decision of Division Bench of this Court. 2.02. In view of above binding decision of Division Bench of this Court and for reasons stated in said decision in case of Rajkot Dist.Co-op. Bank Ltd., present appeal deserves to be dismissed and questions raised in present tax appeal are required to be answered against Revenue and in favour of assessee. It cannot Page 2 of 3 O/TAXAP/321/2015 ORDER be said that learned Tribunal has committed any error in allowing appeal preferred by assessee and in holding that amortization of security premium, as claimed by assessee, is allowable, more particularly, while relying upon binding decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Rajkot Dist.Co-op. Bank Ltd.. 3.00. Under circumstances, both these appeals deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (M.R.SHAH, J.) Sd/- (S.H.VORA, J.) Rafik. Page 3 of 3 Commissioner of Income-tax v. Co-Operative Bank of Rajkot Ltd