Thomas Kurian v. ACIT

106 ITD 158Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#11131 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also reported as

108 TTJ 439

Judgments citing Thomas Kurian v. ACIT

GMR ENERGY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 526/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jagdish K. Jogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…ITA Nos.513 & 526/Bang/2022 M/s. GMR Energy Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.513 & 526/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 & 2020-2021 M/s. GMR Energy Limited No.25/1, Skip House, Museum Road ADIT, CPC Vs. Bangalore 560 025. Bangalore PAN NO : AAACT8420A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Jagdish K. Jogi, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 03.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT…

GMR ENERGY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 513/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jagdish K. Jogi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…ITA Nos.513 & 526/Bang/2022 M/s. GMR Energy Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.513 & 526/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-2020 & 2020-2021 M/s. GMR Energy Limited No.25/1, Skip House, Museum Road ADIT, CPC Vs. Bangalore 560 025. Bangalore PAN NO : AAACT8420A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Jagdish K. Jogi, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R. Date of Hearing : 03.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GHCL LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

ITA 976/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &
Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

…ed to certain relief/deduction or benefits the assessee should not be derived or deprived of it even if the claim periaining to the same is made for the first time before the Tribunal during pendency of appeal before it. In the case of Thomas Kurian Vs. ACIT [106 ITD 158 (Coch.)], the Hon'ble ITAT Cochin bench hcve granted the deduction u/s.80HHC for the first Time before the first appellate authority claimed which the appellant has omitted to make in its return of income. Even the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi in the case of Xerox India Ltd., New Delhi Vs. assessee in 1TA No. 1590/DEL/2010], has observed thai an officer m…

GHCL LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1042/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &
Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

…ed to certain relief/deduction or benefits the assessee should not be derived or deprived of it even if the claim periaining to the same is made for the first time before the Tribunal during pendency of appeal before it. In the case of Thomas Kurian Vs. ACIT [106 ITD 158 (Coch.)], the Hon'ble ITAT Cochin bench hcve granted the deduction u/s.80HHC for the first Time before the first appellate authority claimed which the appellant has omitted to make in its return of income. Even the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi in the case of Xerox India Ltd., New Delhi Vs. assessee in 1TA No. 1590/DEL/2010], has observed thai an officer m…

THE DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL vs. M/S. INDORE EDUCATION AND SERVICE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA 468/IND/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit M/S. Indore Education & (Exemption) Service Society बनाम/ Bhopal 2Nd Floor, Income Tax Office Vs. Metro Walk Building E-5, Arera Colony Near Bittan Market Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aaati3186K

Section 10Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)

…w will be defeated. Reliance is placed on the following case Laws. (i) CIT V Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd 172 Taxman 258 (Delhi) (ii) CIT V Dhampur Sugar Ltd 90 ITR 236 (All) (iii) Bharat Starch Industries Ltd V CIT (ITA No 1611/k/2003 (iv) Thomas Kurian V ACIT 108 TTJ 439 (Cochin) (v) Xerox India Ltd V DCIT New Delhi (ITA No 1580/Del/2010) In the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. (1986) 160 ITR 920 SC, it was observed that: “There is a duty cast on the Income-tax Officer to apply the relevant provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act for the purpose of determining the true figure of the assessee’s taxa…

INCOME TAX OFFICER- 5(1), INDORE vs. M/S. SU-SAMPADA, INDORE

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 504/IND/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borada.Y. 2011-12

Section 139(5)Section 80I

…. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd., 172 Taxman 258 (Del); 3. CIT vs. Dhampur Sugar Ltd., 90 ITR 236 (All.); 4. Chicago Pneumatics India Ltd. vs. DCIt (15 SOT 252) (Mum); 5. Bharat Starch Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (URO) (ITA No.1611/K/2003); 6. Thomas Kurian vs. ACIT, 108 TTJ 439 (Cochin); and 7. Xerox India Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No.1580/Del/2010) (URO). 6. So far as the second ground raised by the Revenue is concerned, the ld. Sr. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted that 6 Su-Sampada the assessee failed to substantiate its claim before the Assessing Officer. On the other hand, the learned Counse…

THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.NITTA GELATINE INDIA LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 301/COCH/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 32Section 40A(3)

…AT, Mumbai in the case of Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. (15 SOT 252), CIT vs. Dhampur Sugar Ltd. (90 ITR 236), Bombay High Court in the case of Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. (349 ITR 336), ITAT, Cochin Bench in the case of Thomas Kurian vs. ACIT (106 ITD 158), Solaris Bio Chemicals Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No.987/2011 dated 13/07/2012 (Delhi) and allowed the claim of the assessee. 18. Against this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. I.T.A. Nos. 301 & 303/Coch/2017 19. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer’s finding that assessee was mak…

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.NITTA GELATINE INDIA LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 303/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 32Section 40A(3)

…AT, Mumbai in the case of Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. (15 SOT 252), CIT vs. Dhampur Sugar Ltd. (90 ITR 236), Bombay High Court in the case of Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. (349 ITR 336), ITAT, Cochin Bench in the case of Thomas Kurian vs. ACIT (106 ITD 158), Solaris Bio Chemicals Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No.987/2011 dated 13/07/2012 (Delhi) and allowed the claim of the assessee. 18. Against this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. I.T.A. Nos. 301 & 303/Coch/2017 19. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer’s finding that assessee was mak…

THE DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL vs. M/S. INDORE EDUCATION AND SERVICE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 63/IND/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 20

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCHE, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT(Exemption), Indore Education and Bhopal Service Society, बनाम/ 04, Sita Building, Y.N. Road, Vs. Indore (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No.AAATI3186K Appellant by Shri V.J. Boricha, Sr. DR Respondent by Shri Sudheer Padliya, CA Date of Hearing: 07.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 15.03.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of In…

D.C.I.T CIR - 2,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S IKF TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2273/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2009-10

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80ISection 8I

…No. 10CCB during assessment proceedings, claiming deduction under s. 80-IB which was not claimed in the return, deduction is admissible even in the absence of a revised return.” Similarly, the Hon’ble ITAT, COCHIN BENCH in the case of Thomsa Kurian Vs. ACIT 106 ITD 158 has decided the issue as under : “Deduction under s. 80HHC—Allowability—Claim made for the first time before CIT(A)—Issue raised before the first appellate authority for deduction under s. 80HHC, being a legal issue coupled with the facts already available on record, as recorded in the assessment order, the first appellate authority should have…