M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

TDS with the Government. 27. A proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to make the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the Section, is required to be read into the Section to give the Section a reasonable interpretation and requires to be treated as retrospective in operation so that a reasonable interpretation

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

TDS with the Government. 27. A proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to make the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the Section, is required to be read into the Section to give the Section a reasonable interpretation and requires to be treated as retrospective in operation so that a reasonable interpretation

KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), THIRUVANANHAPURAM

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2018-19

c) in any other case, determined in accordance with the formula— (X-Y) where, X = the amount of tax calculated on the under-reported income as increased by the total income determined under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143 or total income assessed, reassessed or recomputed in a preceding order as if it were the total income

HI-LITE BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOZHIKODE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2009-10

TDS to the credit of Central Government during the period May,2009 to July,2009 i.e. before the due date specified i 139(1) of the Act for filing the return of Income. On such facts and circumstances the appellant submits that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) cannot be invoked and the disallowance made is unjustified

M/S.KADUTHURUTHY REGIONAL SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. THE JT IT(TDS), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathankaduthuruthy Regional Service Joint Commissioner Of Co-Op Bank Ltd. Income Tax (Tds) Vs. Kaduthuruthuy P.O. Trivandrum Kottayam Pan – Aaajk0315Q Appellant Respondent

C. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have seen that the information under Section 133(6) shall be called for only for the purpose of the Income Tax Act 1961 and no such purpose was mentioned in the notice issued by the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kottayam. D. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have seen

M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD,COCHIN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025

c) whether the Tribunal had erred in directing deduction under Section 80HH and 80-1 on the miscellaneous income of Rs.26,64,113 being income on sale of empty containers, were substantial questions of law and 16 Apollo Tyres Ltd. the High Court erred in dismissing the application of the Department on those questions and the High Court

MR. PREM MUKUNDAN ,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD-2(2), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. (Judicial Member), Ms. Padmavathy S. (Accountant Member)

C) No. 2659 OF 2012 AUGUST 31, 2012 held as follows: - "The second aspect relates to credit of TDS by the taxpayers even when tax is not been credited or paid to the government We do not think that it will be appropriate to address this question in a PIL. We have entertained this PIL not to decide individual claims

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

1) of the Income Tax Act should be enforced after the Tax deductor has satisfied the Officer in charge of TDS, that taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However this will not alter the liability to charge interest under section 201 (lA) of the Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee ITA No.606/Coch/2010

M/S AC CARGO MANAGEMENT P.LTD,,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 320/Coch/2013. िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. Vs. M/S. Ac Cargo Management The Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward 1(1) 1St Floor, Chacko Chambers, Kochi Civil Lines Road, Palarivattom, Kochi 682 025. [Pan Aaeca 2206K] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

TDS has to be made under section 194 C or 194 I. In the case of ACIT vs. Accenture Services (P) Ltd. 44 SOT 290 (Mum) (wherein one of us, the J.M. is a party) the issue wasconsidered in detail as under: - “7. We have considered the rival contentions and relevant record. The short controversy in this case is regarding