ITAT Cochin Judgments — August 2018

The Tribunal held that normal depreciation is an allowable deduction in computing the real income of a charitable institution, following Supreme Court judgments. It also clarified that penalty proceedings under Section 272A(2)(e) require a proper opportunity of hearing before imposition.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to adopt lower GP rates for liquor sales, referencing a previous ITAT order with identical facts. However, the Tribunal found contradictory findings by the CIT(A) regarding the deduction of unrecorded expenses and remitted this issue for fresh examination. Another addition was also remitted for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to adopt lower GP rates for liquor sales, referencing a previous ITAT order with identical facts. However, the Tribunal found contradictory findings by the CIT(A) regarding the deduction of unrecorded expenses and remitted this issue for fresh examination. Another addition was also remitted for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to adopt lower GP rates for liquor sales, referencing a previous ITAT order with identical facts. However, the Tribunal found contradictory findings by the CIT(A) regarding the deduction of unrecorded expenses and remitted this issue for fresh examination. Another addition was also remitted for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal held that tenancy rights, including leasehold rights for land, cannot be construed as intangible assets eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The lease premium paid was for the right to use the land, not for acquiring business or commercial rights of a similar nature to know-how, patents, or licenses.

The Tribunal held that the assessee, being a primary agricultural credit society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2). This was based on the jurisdictional High Court's decision in a similar case.

The Tribunal held that deposits collected from vendors for freezers cannot be considered as income of the assessee as long as the agency agreement continues. This decision followed a previous ruling by the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for an earlier assessment year.

The Tribunal held that the assessee, being a primary agricultural credit society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i). This decision followed the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in the Chirakkal Service Co-operative Society case.

The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A), stating that a primary agricultural credit society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2). The High Court's ruling in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Society was followed.

The Tribunal held that an assessee's right to appeal is not barred by a prior admission or surrender of income. The appellate authorities must consider the merits of the case if the assessee attempts to provide supporting evidence.

The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act does not require disclosure of reasons, and objections can be disposed of within the assessment order itself. It also upheld the taxability of IVP interest on an accrual basis, following a High Court judgment in the assessee's own case.

The Tribunal held that unexplained cash credits assessed under Section 68 cannot be treated as income from 'other sources' and therefore, business losses cannot be set off against them. The CIT's order under Section 263 was therefore justified.

The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act does not require disclosure of reasons, and objections can be disposed of within the assessment order itself. It also upheld the taxability of IVP interest on an accrual basis, following a High Court judgment in the assessee's own case.

The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act does not require disclosure of reasons, and objections can be disposed of within the assessment order itself. It also upheld the taxability of IVP interest on an accrual basis, following a High Court judgment in the assessee's own case.

The Tribunal held that an assessee's right to appeal is not barred by a prior admission or surrender of income. The appellate authorities must consider the merits of the case if the assessee attempts to provide supporting evidence.

The Tribunal held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) applies to searches conducted after June 1, 2007, deeming income declared in post-search returns as concealed. Therefore, penalty is leviable on income detected during search and offered in subsequent returns.

The Tribunal held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) applies to searches conducted after June 1, 2007, deeming income declared in post-search returns as concealed. Therefore, penalty is leviable on income detected during search and offered in subsequent returns.

The Tribunal held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) applies to searches conducted after June 1, 2007, deeming income declared in post-search returns as concealed. Therefore, penalty is leviable on income detected during search and offered in subsequent returns.

The Tribunal held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) applies to searches conducted after June 1, 2007, deeming income declared in post-search returns as concealed. Therefore, penalty is leviable on income detected during search and offered in subsequent returns.

The Tribunal held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) applies to searches conducted after June 1, 2007, deeming income declared in post-search returns as concealed. Therefore, penalty is leviable on income detected during search and offered in subsequent returns.

The Tribunal presumed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeals due to their absence. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal presumed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeals due to their absence. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal presumed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeals due to their absence. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal held that a primary agricultural credit society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2). This decision followed the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.

The Tribunal presumed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeals due to their absence. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) applies to searches conducted after June 1, 2007, deeming income declared in post-search returns as concealed. Therefore, penalty is leviable on income detected during search and offered in subsequent returns.

The Tribunal held that the assessee, being a primary agricultural credit society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2). This decision followed the jurisdictional High Court's ruling in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.

The Tribunal presumed that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeals due to their absence. Following established precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal presumed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeals due to their absence. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine for non-prosecution.

The Tribunal held that the assessee is eligible for interest under Section 244A on the excess self-assessment tax paid. This decision was based on previous rulings by the Tribunal in similar cases involving the same assessee.