Mahaveer Enterprises v. UoI

Mr.P.C.Jose, Cochin vs. DCIT, Cochin

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasp.C. Jose Deputy Commissioner Of Prop. Brothers Agencies Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Jews Street Vs. Kochi Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of P.C. Jose Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Prop. Brothers Agencies Kochi Vs. Jews Street Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial Member P.C. Jose Deputy Commissioner of Prop. Brothers Agencies Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Jews Street vs. Kochi Ernakulam 682031 [PAN: ABBPJ8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner of P.C. Jose Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Prop. Brothers Agencies Kochi vs. Jews Street Ernakulam 682031 [PAN: ABBPJ8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: ----- None ----- Revenue by: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 23.04.2024 O R D E R Per: Sa…

George Stanley, Thiruvalla vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Circle, Trivandrum, Thiruvananthapuram

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, AM &Shri Manomohan Das, JM ITA No.587/Coch/2022: Asst.Year: 2014-2015 George Stanley The Deputy Commissioner of Grace Villa Income-tax, International vs. Near Head Post Office Taxation Circle, Trivandrum Thiruvalla – 689 101. [PAN: AKMPS0862N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Ms.Telma Raju, Advocate Respondent by: Sri. Sajit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Date of Hearing : 09.08.2023 Pronouncement: 31.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating the dismissal of his appeal contesting…

DCIT, Cochin vs. Shri M George ( Mukkadayil Joseph George), Cochin

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasdy. Cit, Circle 2(1), Range – 2 M.J. George C.R. Building, I.S. Press Road, Mukkadayil House Kochi 682018 Vs. Krishnaswamy Cross Road Ernakulam, Kochi - 682035 [Pan: Adgpg6991D] (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Sri Sajit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Assessee By: Sri R. Lokanathan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2023 Order Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Agitating The Allowance Of The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 31.12.2008 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2006-07, By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kochi [Cit(A)] Vide His Order Dated 31.03.2011. 2. The Facts Of The Case In Brief Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Who Had Returned His Income For The Year At Rs.63,420/- (From Business & Other Sources), Was Found To Have A Credit Of Rs.899.10 Lakhs In His Bank Account On 14.02.2006. The Same Was Explained In The Assessment Proceedings As Sale Proceeds Of 5.21 Acres Of Land At Kakkanad Village, Falling Under Thrikkakara Panchayat, Sold For Rs.977.10 Lakhs Vide Registered Sale Deed Dated 13.02.2006. The Sale Was In Pursuance Of An Agreement To Sell Dated 09.01.2006, Receiving Rs.78 Lakhs As Advance. The Said Land

…of transfer.’ (emphasis, ours) 5.2 It would be useful here to advert to the tests succinctly culled out on an exhaustive consideration of the matter on the anvil of the judicial precedents by the Hon'ble Court in Mahaveer Enterprises vs. Union of India[2000] 244 ITR 798 (Raj): ‘The question whether a piece of land is agricultural land or not, is essentially a question of fact. The facts that raise a presumption that the land is non-agricultural are— (i) situation of the land, for example, land situated in an urban area within the municipal limits in the proximity of buildings and building sites, [ (ii) sale of l…