Loading ITAT cases…
318 tribunal orders from the Cochin bench in 2020.
Showing 40 of 318 orders. Use the months below for the rest.
The Tribunal held that the Income Tax Officer (Intelligence) had the jurisdiction to issue notices under Section 133(6) for general enquiries to identify potential taxable income. It also found the penalty order to be within the time limits and that the assessee had not shown reasonable cause for non-compliance.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was followed by the CIT(A) initially. However, the subsequent Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was also brought to the CIT(A)'s attention for rectification.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court had previously held that co-operative societies were eligible for deduction under Section 80P. However, the subsequent Full Bench decision of the same High Court in the Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. case, which disallowed such deductions for co-operative banks, was also brought to notice. The Tribunal decided to follow the later Full Bench decision.
The Tribunal, following the jurisdictional High Court's Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT, held that co-operative banks engaged in banking business are not entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) and Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was followed by the CIT(A) initially. However, the subsequent Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. appears to have led to the rectification. The appeals are being decided based on the prevailing legal position.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was followed by the CIT(A) initially. However, the subsequent Full Bench decision in The Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was also brought to the CIT(A)'s attention for rectification.
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to the inordinate delay and lack of proper reasons for condonation. Consequently, the cross-objections filed by the assessee were also dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was initially followed by the CIT(A). However, a subsequent Full Bench decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. led to the rectification. The Tribunal's order seems to be remanding the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to the inordinate delay and lack of proper reasons for condonation. Consequently, the cross-objections filed by the assessee were also dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to the inordinate delay and lack of proper reasons for condonation. Consequently, the cross-objections filed by the assessee were also dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was initially followed by the CIT(A). However, a subsequent Full Bench decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. led to the rectification. The Tribunal's order seems to be remanding the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It noted that the High Court's decision in Mavilayi's case was pending before the Supreme Court and that the assessee's eligibility for deduction under Section 80P needed further consideration.
The Tribunal held that there was a violation of the principles of natural justice as the assessee, being in judicial custody, could not make an effective representation. The assessment was therefore restored to the AO for re-adjudication.
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals due to the inordinate delay and lack of proper reasons for condonation. Consequently, the cross-objections filed by the assessee were also dismissed as infructuous.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. was initially followed by the CIT(A). However, a subsequent Full Bench decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. led to the rectification. The Tribunal's order seems to be remanding the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that since the original assessment orders no longer survived due to the ITAT's order restoring the Section 80P issue to the AO, the subsequent Section 263 orders, which were based on those assessment orders, also could not survive and were liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal held that since the original assessment orders no longer survived due to the ITAT's order restoring the Section 80P issue to the AO, the subsequent Section 263 orders, which were based on those assessment orders, also could not survive and were liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal held that since the original assessment orders no longer survived due to the ITAT's order restoring the Section 80P issue to the AO, the subsequent Section 263 orders, which were based on those assessment orders, also could not survive and were liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The tribunal heard the Revenue's representative and noted the assessee's request for withdrawal. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The tribunal heard the Revenue's representative and noted the assessee's request for withdrawal. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
The Tribunal held that the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS on interest paid to its members, following previous ITAT rulings. However, the issue of Section 80P deduction was not fully decided in this excerpt.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that since the original assessment orders no longer survived due to the ITAT's order restoring the Section 80P issue to the AO, the subsequent Section 263 orders, which were based on those assessment orders, also could not survive and were liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was justified in rectifying his earlier order to disallow the deduction under Section 80P, in light of the subsequent Full Bench judgment of the Kerala High Court.
The Tribunal held that since the original assessment orders no longer survived due to the ITAT's order restoring the Section 80P issue to the AO, the subsequent Section 263 orders, which were based on those assessment orders, also could not survive and were liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal held that since the original assessment orders no longer survived due to the ITAT's order restoring the Section 80P issue to the AO, the subsequent Section 263 orders, which were based on those assessment orders, also could not survive and were liable to be quashed.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be regarded as a co-operative bank as it does not possess a banking license from the RBI and lacks facilities enjoyed by scheduled banks. Therefore, the embargo under Section 80P(4) is not applicable.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal noted that the High Court's judgment in Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT held that a certificate issued to an assessee by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies is crucial. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered this aspect and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) was disallowed by the lower authorities. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowance based on the finding that the assessee was engaged in banking and its agricultural credit was minimal.
The Tribunal held that the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) was disallowed by the lower authorities. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowance based on the finding that the assessee was engaged in banking and its agricultural credit was minimal.
The Tribunal held that there was a violation of the principles of natural justice as the assessee was not adequately given the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses whose statements were used against him. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for re-adjudication.
The Tribunal held that the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) was disallowed by the lower authorities. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowance based on the finding that the assessee was engaged in banking and not a primary agricultural credit society.
The Tribunal noted that the jurisdictional High Court in the Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. case had held that when a certificate is issued to an assessee, it is binding. The judgment then refers to the assessee's reliance on this and other grounds, indicating a potential for the assessee's arguments to be considered.