INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 AND TPS, KANNUR vs. KANNUR BUILDING MATERIALS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, PAPPINISSERY, KANNUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps .......... Appellant Aayakar Bhavban, Chovva P.O., Kannur 670006 Vs. Kannur Building Materials Co-Op. Society Ltd .......... Respondent No. C 1741, Pappinissery P.O., Kannur 670561 [Pan: Aaaak7151K]

TDS provisions were applicable. 5.10 In ground no. 6, the appellant has raised the plea that the assessment order is barred by limitation of time u/s 153 in as much as the order and demand notice u/s 156 was served on the assessee only on 02-04-2016. 5.11 On perusal of the records, it is seen that both

KERALA AGRO MACHINERY CORPORATION LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , RANGE -1 , KOCHI, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2011-12 Kerala Agro Machinery Corporation Limited Athani Aluva Adit, Range-1 Vs. Ernakulam Kochi Kerala 683 585 Pan No : Aaack9968Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Mrs. Remya S. Menon, A.R. Respondent By : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.04.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 24.4.2024 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064318699(1) For The Ay 2011-12 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of the Act and Rs.1,02,500/- has been disallowed. ii. Expenditure on which TDS

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

02-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER These are the appeals filed by the assessee challenging the separate orders of the Ld.CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru all dated 23/08/2023 in respect of the A.Ys. 2005-06 to 2009-10. Page 2 of 8 ITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023 2. All these appeals

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

02-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER These are the appeals filed by the assessee challenging the separate orders of the Ld.CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru all dated 23/08/2023 in respect of the A.Ys. 2005-06 to 2009-10. Page 2 of 8 ITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023 2. All these appeals

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

02-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER These are the appeals filed by the assessee challenging the separate orders of the Ld.CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru all dated 23/08/2023 in respect of the A.Ys. 2005-06 to 2009-10. Page 2 of 8 ITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023 2. All these appeals

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,COCHIN vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

02-07-2025\nDate of Pronouncement : 23-09-2025\nORDER\nPER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER\nThese are the appeals filed by the assessee challenging the separate\norders of the Ld.CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru all dated 23/08/2023 in respect of\nthe A.Ys. 2005-06 to 2009-10.\nPage 2 of 8\nITA Nos. 720 to 724/Coch/2023\n2. All these appeals

CLINT MARTEL WILFRED,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL CIT (A) BENGALURU - 12, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Clint Martel Wilfred Dcit (Interational Taxation) Clint Dale, Moolankuzhy Kochi Vs. Nazreth, Ernakulam 682002 [Pan: Abnpw6970H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 147 of the Act was initiated. During the assessment proceeding, the assessee was asked to explain the sources of cash deposit of Rs. 1,02,00,000/- as on 21st October 2010 in his bank account. It was explained that there was award passed by the court dated 6th 4. December 2006 in favor of his father late Shri

MOHAMED MUSTHAFA KUNNATH CHENGAANA,CALICUT vs. ITO,WARD 2(3), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

02,310. While doing so, the AO made an addition of Rs.47,46,509 being the share of enhanced compensation received by the appellant u/s.18 of the Land Acquisition Act, by holding that it is adventure in the nature of trade. 3. The factual background of the issue is that the land in Ramanattukara comprised in R.S.No. 237/5A

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

TDS. The issue arose in the context of s. 214, providing for interest payable by the Government on refund of advance tax, where paid in excess. The refund to the assessee of such excess, it explained, is of the tax. This change in character was not stand altered on the assessment being subsequently set aside. The interest to the assessee

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

TDS. The issue arose in the context of s. 214, providing for interest payable by the Government on refund of advance tax, where paid in excess. The refund to the assessee of such excess, it explained, is of the tax. This change in character was not stand altered on the assessment being subsequently set aside. The interest to the assessee

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

TDS. The issue arose in the context of s. 214, providing for interest payable by the Government on refund of advance tax, where paid in excess. The refund to the assessee of such excess, it explained, is of the tax. This change in character was not stand altered on the assessment being subsequently set aside. The interest to the assessee

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

TDS. The issue arose in the context of s. 214, providing for interest payable by the Government on refund of advance tax, where paid in excess. The refund to the assessee of such excess, it explained, is of the tax. This change in character was not stand altered on the assessment being subsequently set aside. The interest to the assessee