A & B ASSOCIATES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by directing the AO to -

TDS. As the business was not profitable, and for some other major reasons, the relationship between the partners was substantially damaged and the partners had lost confidence between them. After some preliminary legal steps, they have decided to dissolve the firm and 4 A&B Associates accordingly, the firm was dissolved w.e.f. 05/07/2018 on the condition that the business will

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

natural justice, it went on to explain, there is no final decision of the cause and fresh proceedings are left open. All that is done is that the order assailed by virtue of its inherent defect is vacated but the proceedings are not terminated. We advert to this decision for the principle involved; there being no dispute that the proceedings

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

natural justice, it went on to explain, there is no final decision of the cause and fresh proceedings are left open. All that is done is that the order assailed by virtue of its inherent defect is vacated but the proceedings are not terminated. We advert to this decision for the principle involved; there being no dispute that the proceedings

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

natural justice, it went on to explain, there is no final decision of the cause and fresh proceedings are left open. All that is done is that the order assailed by virtue of its inherent defect is vacated but the proceedings are not terminated. We advert to this decision for the principle involved; there being no dispute that the proceedings

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

natural justice, it went on to explain, there is no final decision of the cause and fresh proceedings are left open. All that is done is that the order assailed by virtue of its inherent defect is vacated but the proceedings are not terminated. We advert to this decision for the principle involved; there being no dispute that the proceedings

ACIT, TRICHUR vs. M/S. ATLAS JEWELLERY INDIA LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

TDS is not applicable. The Atlas Jewellery India Ltd. CIT(A) also deleted the addition made on account of provision for making charges considering the fact that making charges were paid subsequently. The CIT(A) also deleted the addition made on account of wastage considering the submission of the appellant that the AO made the addition on misconception that jewellery

ACIT, TRICHUR vs. M/S. ATLAS JEWELLERY INDIA LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

TDS is not applicable. The Atlas Jewellery India Ltd. CIT(A) also deleted the addition made on account of provision for making charges considering the fact that making charges were paid subsequently. The CIT(A) also deleted the addition made on account of wastage considering the submission of the appellant that the AO made the addition on misconception that jewellery

ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE PR CIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Asianet Satellite Vs. Pcit, Communications Pvt. Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram. 2A, 2Nd Floor, Carnival Technopark, Technopark, Kazhakuttom, Karyavattom, P. O., Thiruvananthapuram. Pan : Aaeca 5548 E Appellant Respondent

TDS 98,53,799 Service Tax Interest (Tvm) 8,49,279 Total 1,07,06,264 3. The AO did not pass any final order u/s.154. In the meanwhile the PCIT, on verification of assessment records, noticed that the same issue where the assessee has debited an amount of Rs.1,07,06,000/- towards interest on delayed payment of service

TRIO SHOPPING MALL SPACES PRIVATE LIMITED,CALICUT vs. JCIT,TDS, KOCHI

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

TDS. In our considered opinion, the interest of justice requires that the assessee be granted a reasonable opportunity to present its case. The natural

TRIO SHOPPING MALL SPACES PRIVATE LIMITED,CALICUT vs. JCIT,TDS, KOCHI

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

TDS. In our considered opinion, the interest of justice requires that the assessee be granted a reasonable opportunity to present its case. The natural

MUTHOOT SYNDICATE NIDHI LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2016-17 Muthoot Syndicate Nidhi Ltd. .......... Appellant South Block, Ground Floor, Muthoot Floors Thycaud, Thiruvananthapuram 695014 [Pan: Aaccm9379D] Vs. Dcit, Thiruvananthapuram .......... Respondent Assessee By: Rajeev R., Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.08.2025

TDS Officer. In our considered opinion the order passed by the CIT(A) does not meet the requirement of a reasoned order, was passed in breach of the principles of natural justice

THAZHAYIL NIDHI LIMITED,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, and it’s stay application, dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manohohan Dassa No. 65/Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Thazhayil Nidhi Ltd. Income Tax Officer (Tds) Building No. 6/4 Alappuzha Thazhayil Building Vs. [Pan:Tvdto2397D] Elanthoor Pathanamthitta 689643 (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS) Building No. 6/4 Alappuzha Thazhayil Building vs. [PAN:TVDTO2397D] Elanthoor Pathanamthitta 689643 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Abhijith Satheesh, CA Respondent by: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 25.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 25.01.2024 O R D E R Per: Sanjay Arora, AM This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating the dismissal of it’s appeal

DJ AMUSEMENTS,8/58 8/58 ,CHATHANKANDATH HOUSE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PALAKKAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Hon’Ble Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.758/Coch/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dj Amusements, The Income Tax Officer, Mankara P.O, Vs. Ward-1 & Tps, Palakkad – 678 614. Palakkad. Kerala Pan: Aahfd 2211P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sivadas Chettoor, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Smt Leena Lal, Snr Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ():

TDS was deductible, and consequently, the order passed under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A) is unsustainable in law. DJ Amesements :- 3 -: 4. We find from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) that the above grounds and legal submissions, especially regarding the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 4/2002 were not adjudicated at all. The impugned appellate order does

INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

TDS was not deducted. The assessee denied the status of the society as a co-operative society and consequently, treating interest income of Rs.2,95,38,828/- as income from other sources, thereby denying deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d). Further, the AO made addition of Rs.13,47,19,707/- under Section

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.TAJ KERALA HOTELS & RESORTS LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

TDS is required to be made. The CIT(A), after considering the written submission filed before him as well as the evidences furnished in support of the consultancy services, deleted the addition accepting the written submissions and the additional evidence filed by the assessee. The CIT(A) also deleted the addition made on account of foreign travel expenses by holding

THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S.TAJ KERALA HOTELS & RESORTS LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

TDS is required to be made. The CIT(A), after considering the written submission filed before him as well as the evidences furnished in support of the consultancy services, deleted the addition accepting the written submissions and the additional evidence filed by the assessee. The CIT(A) also deleted the addition made on account of foreign travel expenses by holding

VADAKKEVILA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

justice, and fair play. 2 ITA No.478/Coch/2023. Vadakkevila SCB Ltd. 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer denying the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s 80P of the Act without following

M/S.KERALA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Kerala State Warehousing Vs Acit, Corporate Circle 1(2) Corporation Is Press Road Kochi 682018 Pb No. 1727, Warehousing Corporation Road Ernakulam 682016 Pan – Aabck1583G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Gopi, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shantam Bose, Cit Dr

TDS - Large other expenses claimed in the Profit and Loss Account. n) The Assessing officer after examining reasons for selecting the return for limited scrutiny based on the records and submissions made by the assessee accepted the return and completed the Limited scrutiny by order dated 27.10.2017 without any adjustment to the loss as returned. o) The reason for initiation