ITAT Cochin Judgments — September 2022

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, CHAKKITTAPARA BRANCH,KOZHIKODE vs THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

ITA 773/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q,Q4)]Status: Disposed12 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, CHERPULASSERY BRANCH,PALAKKAD vs THE ITO WARD TDS, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD

ITA 725/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: Disposed12 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, CHERPULASSERY BRANCH,PALAKKAD vs THE ITO WARD TDS, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD

ITA 726/COCH/2022[2013-2014(26Q, Q3)]Status: Disposed12 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, CALICUT CITY BRANCH,KOZHIKODE vs THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

ITA 761/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q2)]Status: Disposed12 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, EZHAMKULAM BRANCH,PATHANAMTHITTA vs THE ITO WARD TDS, TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

ITA 784/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: Disposed6 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, CHANGARAMKULAM BRANCH,MALAPPURAM vs THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

ITA 783/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q4)]Status: Disposed6 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, CHAMRAVATTOM BRANCH,MALAPPURAM vs THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

ITA 782/COCH/2022[2013-2014(27Q,Q4)]Status: Disposed6 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, THAZHEKODE BRANCH,MALAPPURAM vs THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

ITA 785/COCH/2022[2013-2014(24Q,Q3)]Status: Disposed6 Sept 2022Allowed

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not considering the merits of the case, especially in light of jurisdictional High Court decisions. Non-consideration of a jurisdictional High Court decision constitutes a mistake apparent from the record.