Indbank Merchant Banking Services Ltd

The Company does not have a regular Chair and as per the Company's Articles of Association,the director nominated by the Holding Entity shall be appointed as the chair of the Board and Genera lMeetings.Accordingly, Shri Ashutosh Choudhury, Director, who was nominated by Indian Bank (the Holding Entity), has been elected to chair the Meetings. Therefore, he is marked as Chairman of the Board of Directors.

The company has not made any recent investments in unquoted shares.Howeve, the company had invested in unquoted shares prior to theyear2000, amounting to Rs.759.48 lakhs. The full amount has been provided for, in the company's books.

The key point of dispute was the disallowance of 1086.54 lakhs claimed as a provision for Non-Performing Assets (NPAs). The Assessing Officer had treated it as a mere provision and not a valid write-off of bad debt. Subsequently, the matter travelled through the appellate hierarchy, and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai Bench, vide its order dated 03.11.2010 ultimately deleted the disallowance in favour of the Company. Being aggrieved, the Revenue appealed against this decision before the Hon'ble Madras High Court in T.C.A. No. 193 of 2011. The High Court, in its judgment dated 26.03.2025, has set aside the ITAT order and remitted the entire case back to the Original Authority to redo the exercise afresh and pass a fresh order. Accordingly the department has issued an Assessment order dated 16.12.2025 raised a demand of Rs.792.44 lakhs including interest and have given an option for the Company to appeal against the order. In the latest assessment order dated 16.12.2025 issued by the department there were mistakes apparent on record which needs to be rectified and if rectified the demand of Rs.792.44 lakhs would result in a refund of Rs.0.74 lakhs. Subsequently on 06.02.2026, the company has formally filed a rectification request and also replied to penalty proceedings on 18.02.2026 before the Assessing Officer for correcting the mistakes and issue a fresh order. The Company has also filed an appeal with the Joint Commissioner of Appeals against the order of the Assessment Officer on 14.01.2026. The Income Tax Department has issued a Rectification order U/s 154 of the Act for AY 1996-97 stating that there is Nil demand for the AY 1996-97.

During the financial year 1995-96, the company has written off Rs.10,86,54,376.89 as irrecoverable in respect of monies lent by the company in the ordinary course of business in respect of certain 13 Intercorporate Deposit accounts. The amounts written off has been debited to the profit & loss account - appropriations under the Head “Provisions for Non-performing Assets” in the published accounts for the year 1995-96. In the notes on accounts under Schedule M under Note – 4, it was disclosed that “In accordance with the Prudential Norms prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India, provision against the Non Performing assets has been in the accounts and the same has been reduced from the current assets”. The appropriations forms part of the Profit & Loss account and the accounts has to be read along with the schedules. The same was not allowed by the assessing officer vide assessment order dated 25.03.1999 and the Company has gone on appeal further with CIT (Appeals) and CIT (Appeals) vide its order dated 28.04.2010 upheld the appeal by the Company and allowed the provision of non-performing assets amounting to Rs.108654376.89.. Aggrieved by this the department went on an appeal with Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and ITAT vide its order dated 03.11.2010 dismissed the appeal of the department and upheld the order of CIT(A) appeals. The Department filed appeal before the High Court Madras. TCA 193 of 2011. The case came up for hearing on 26.03.2025 before the Hourable High Court. The following are the Substantial Questions of law involved in the Appeal. 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance of Rs. 10,86,54,376.89 being provision for non-performing assets? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in applying the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Bank Vs. CIT (323 ITR 166) wherein it was held that even if the individual debtor’s account had not been written off, it was enough if the amount was debited to the Profit & Loss account and the current assets were reduced by the amount of bad debts whereas in the assessee’s case, the assessee had not debited the amount to the Profit & Loss Account but had debited the same only in the Profit & Loss Appropriation Account? After hearing both the sides, the Hon’ble Bench has set aside the orders of the lower authorities on this issue and remitted the issue back to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in the light of the tests laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijaya Bank Vs CIT dated 15.04.2010 reported in 323 ITR 166 more particularly para No 7 of the judgment.