ITAT Cochin Judgments — November 2021

SRI.KAMATTIERI KUNNUMMAL SIDDIQUE,KOZHIKKODE vs THE DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 250/COCH/2020[2005-06]Status: Disposed10 Nov 2021AY 2005-06Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee no longer survived.

SRI.KAMATTIERI KUNNUMMAL SIDDIQUE,KOZHIKKODE vs THE DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 256/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: Disposed10 Nov 2021AY 2011-12Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee no longer survived.

SRI.KAMATTIERI KUNNUMMAL SIDDIQUE,KOZHIKKODE vs THE DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 252/COCH/2020[2007-08]Status: Disposed10 Nov 2021AY 2007-08Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee no longer survived.

SRI.KAMATTIERI KUNNUMMAL SIDDIQUE,KOZHIKKODE vs THE DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 254/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: Disposed10 Nov 2021AY 2009-10Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee no longer survived.

SRI.KAMATTIERI KUNNUMMAL SIDDIQUE,KOZHIKKODE vs THE DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 253/COCH/2020[2008-09]Status: Disposed10 Nov 2021AY 2008-09Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee no longer survived.

SRI.KAMATTIERI KUNNUMMAL SIDDIQUE,KOZHIKKODE vs THE DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 255/COCH/2020[2010-11]Status: Disposed10 Nov 2021AY 2010-11Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee no longer survived.

SRI.KAMATTIERI KUNNUMMAL SIDDIQUE,KOZHIKKODE vs THE DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 251/COCH/2020[2006-07]Status: Disposed10 Nov 2021AY 2006-07Dismissed

As the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted by the Revenue, the appeal filed by the assessee no longer survived.

MALABAR SAND AND STONE P. LTD,KANNUR vs THE ACIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 406/COCH/2020[2013-14]Status: Disposed9 Nov 2021AY 2013-14Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme had been accepted. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee no longer survived.

MALABAR SAND AND STONE P. LTD,KANNUR vs THE ACIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 407/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed9 Nov 2021AY 2014-15Dismissed

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme had been accepted. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee no longer survived.

SRI.V.I. GEORGE KUTTY,KOLLAM vs THE ITO, KOLLAM

ITA 107/COCH/2021[2004-05]Status: Disposed9 Nov 2021AY 2004-05Allowed

The Tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied solely on estimated income, as it does not constitute concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The additions made were purely on an estimation basis.

M/S.CHEKKATTU CHITTY FUND,THIRUVALLA vs THE ITO, THIRUVALLA

ITA 557/COCH/2019[1993-94]Status: Disposed9 Nov 2021AY 1993-94Withdrawn

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed an application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme, which was accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S.HLL LIFECARE LTD(,TRIVANDRUM vs THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

ITA 606/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: Disposed9 Nov 2021AY 2008-09Withdrawn

As the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted and the appeal no longer survives, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

M/S.MALABAR SAND & STONE P LTD,KANNUR vs THE ACIT, KOZHIKKODE

ITA 405/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Nov 2021AY 2012-13Withdrawn

As the assessee's application under the Vivad-se-Viswas Scheme was accepted and the appeals no longer survived, the tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn.

SRI.V.I. GEORGE KUTTY,KOLLAM vs THE ITO, KOLLAM

ITA 106/COCH/2021[2003-04]Status: Disposed9 Nov 2021AY 2003-04Allowed

The Tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied solely on estimated income, as it does not constitute concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The additions made were purely on an estimation basis.

CITY UNION BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs THE ITO, THRISSUR

ITA 103/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2021AY 2015-16Remanded

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A) orders and restored the issues for readjudication. This was done to grant the assessee an adequate opportunity to present its case, considering the challenges faced due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

M/S. PANAYAL SERVICE O-OP BANK LTD,KASARGODE vs THE ITO, KASARGODE

ITA 73/COCH/2021[2008-09]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2021AY 2008-09Allowed

The Tribunal held that the Supreme Court's decision in Civil Appeal Nos. 7343 to 7350 of 2019 has set aside the Full Bench decision of the Kerala High Court. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) even if loans were given to non-agricultural purposes or to nominal members, provided profits from loans to non-members are excluded.

M/S.PANAYAL SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KASARGODE vs THE ITO, KASARGODE

ITA 74/COCH/2021[2009-10]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2021AY 2009-10Allowed

The Tribunal held that the Supreme Court's decision in Civil Appeal Nos. 7343 to 7350 of 2019 has set aside the Full Bench decision of the Kerala High Court. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) even if loans were given to non-agricultural purposes or to nominal members, provided profits from loans to non-members are excluded.

M/S.PANAYAL SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KASARGOD vs THE ITO, KASARGOD

ITA 76/COCH/2021[2017-18]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2021AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that the Supreme Court's decision in Civil Appeal Nos. 7343 to 7350 of 2019 has set aside the Full Bench decision of the Kerala High Court. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) even if loans were given to non-agricultural purposes or to nominal members, provided profits from loans to non-members are excluded.

CITY UNION BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs THE ITO, THRISSUR

ITA 104/COCH/2021[2016-17]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2021AY 2016-17Remanded

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A) orders and restored the issues for readjudication. This was done to grant the assessee an adequate opportunity to present its case, considering the challenges faced due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

CITY UNION BANK LTD,TRICHUR vs ITO, THRISSUR

ITA 102/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2021AY 2014-15Remanded

The Tribunal noted that the assessee could not represent their case effectively due to the Covid-19 pandemic and work-from-home situation. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A) orders and restored the issues for readjudication.

M/S.PANAYAL SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KASARGODE vs THE ITO, KASARGODE

ITA 75/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: Disposed4 Nov 2021AY 2014-15Allowed

The Tribunal held that the Supreme Court's decision in Civil Appeal Nos. 7343 to 7350 of 2019 has set aside the Full Bench decision of the Kerala High Court. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) even if loans were given to non-agricultural purposes or to nominal members, provided profits from loans to non-members are excluded.