Search: TDS | BharatTax

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

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 308/COCH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. J.M. Jamuna Devi

Section 133Section 133(6)Section 194A

TDS) is not an authority to invoke provision under the said section. C. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have seen that the information under Section 133

MR.THOMAS DANIEL,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 68/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.68/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

Section 194ASection 40Section 44A

TDS u/s 194A. The Ld. AR submitted that Section I94A does not apply to individuals unless he is a person liable to tax audit u/s 44AB of the I.T. Act 1961 and in this case, the assessee, being an individual is not within the purview of the said section. Therefore, it was submitted that the department will have to I.T.A

M/S.VENNALA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO, KOCHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee was rejected by the CIT(A) for assessment year under consideration

ITA 129/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sri.Amaljith P.J., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Shantom Bose, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 154Section 19Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 2(19)Section 234ASection 250Section 40Section 80P

section 194A(3)(v) and 194A(3)(viia)(a), the appellant is not liable to deduct TDS on interest payments. The assessing 2 M/s.The Vennala SCB Ltd. officer erred in making additions u/s. 40(a)(ia) for not deducting TDS. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) erred in not considering this ground. 3. Appellant is eligible for deduction

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 465/COCH/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

TDS only on a sum of Rs. 1,32,42,920/- and on the balance amount no tax was deducted at source treating it as mere reimbursement of expenditure to MPCMS. The said payee, i.e. MPCMS also raised different bills. The AO was of the opinion that the money paid towards management consultancy charges under composite contract and the contract

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 496/COCH/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

TDS only on a sum of Rs. 1,32,42,920/- and on the balance amount no tax was deducted at source treating it as mere reimbursement of expenditure to MPCMS. The said payee, i.e. MPCMS also raised different bills. The AO was of the opinion that the money paid towards management consultancy charges under composite contract and the contract

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 464/COCH/2025[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Aug 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 40

TDS only on a sum of Rs. 1,32,42,920/- and on the balance amount no tax was deducted at source treating it as mere reimbursement of expenditure to MPCMS. The said payee, i.e. MPCMS also raised different bills. The AO was of the opinion that the money paid towards management consultancy charges under composite contract and the contract