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 and the assessee had failed to effect such deductions. According to him, lower authorities were justified in applying Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. :- 6 -: 7. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. It would be apposite to have look at the MOU entered by the assessee for leasing the Containarized

BHIMA JEWELLERS,SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD vs. THE PR CIT, KOZHIKKODE, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.208/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Bhima Jewellers, Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income- 6/785 Ai, Tax, Kozhikode. Mysore Road, Chungum Junction, Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad-673 592. [Pan: Aakfb 9817C] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Revenue By Shri Dhanaraj A. Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri R. Krishnan, Ca Date Of Hearing 05/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 20/08/2018

TDS) in ITA Nos. 4010&4011/Mum/2014 dated 19/02/2016 (ITAT, Mumbai Benches) iv) Lakshya Seth vs. ITO in ITA No. 218/Del/2015 dated 07/10/2015 (ITAT, Delhi Benches) 4 v) Akr Poly Industries vs. Department of Income Tax in ITA No.1042/Mds/2012 dated 29/01/2013 (ITAT, Chennai Benches) 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the judgment on the Kerala High Court

IFTHIKAR KARUPPAMVEETIL ABDUL RAHMAN,CHAVAKKAD vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, KOCHI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

15)(b)(ii) was vide Finance Act, 2020, is by way of a substitution. Non- residents who were not eligible assessees under Section 144C of the Act prior to 31.03.2020, were brought within the ambit of the Section, w.e.f 01.04.2020 only. Insofar as a non- resident is concerned, it is a new imposition/coverage under a taxing provision

M/S.KERALA STATE CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEV BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM

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

15. Having held as aforesaid, the question for further consideration is as to whether the appellant is also a primary agricultural credit society. We proceed to decide that issue. 16. In terms of Clause (a) of the Explanation to section 80P(4), “primary agricultural credit society” takes the meaning assigned to it in Part V of the BR Act. Clause

M/S.KERALA STATE CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEV BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM

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

15. Having held as aforesaid, the question for further consideration is as to whether the appellant is also a primary agricultural credit society. We proceed to decide that issue. 16. In terms of Clause (a) of the Explanation to section 80P(4), “primary agricultural credit society” takes the meaning assigned to it in Part V of the BR Act. Clause

M/S.KERALA STATE CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEV BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM

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

15. Having held as aforesaid, the question for further consideration is as to whether the appellant is also a primary agricultural credit society. We proceed to decide that issue. 16. In terms of Clause (a) of the Explanation to section 80P(4), “primary agricultural credit society” takes the meaning assigned to it in Part V of the BR Act. Clause

THOMAS JOHN MUTHOOT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 , THIRUVALLA, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Thomas John Muthoot Dcit, Circle - 1 Muthoot Centre, Punnen Road Thiruvalla Vs. Thiruvananthapuram 695001 [Pan: Abnpt4694B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act stating that there cannot be any disallowance of the expenses on account of non- deduction of TDS if the recipient of such amount has offered the same as income in its return of income. Admittedly such amendment was effective from 01.04.2013 whereas the year before us relates

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT,TDS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

TDS in case of entities whose income is exempt under Section 10 of the IT Act. 5 AAAAL0822C LBS CENTRE 64,44,687 No proof submitted for non- 644,469/- FOR SCIENCE deduction of Tax at source. AND TECHNOLOG Y Total 15

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

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

TDS Central Processing Zone, Ghaziabad imposed fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per intimations u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as under:- Financial Quarter Amount levied u/s. 234E Date of intimation Year No. 2012-13 Q2 Rs. 11,250/- 20.11.2015 2012-13 Q3 Rs. 15

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

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

TDS Central Processing Zone, Ghaziabad imposed fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per intimations u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as under:- Financial Quarter Amount levied u/s. 234E Date of intimation Year No. 2012-13 Q2 Rs. 11,250/- 20.11.2015 2012-13 Q3 Rs. 15

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

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

TDS Central Processing Zone, Ghaziabad imposed fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per intimations u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as under:- Financial Quarter Amount levied u/s. 234E Date of intimation Year No. 2012-13 Q2 Rs. 11,250/- 20.11.2015 2012-13 Q3 Rs. 15

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

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

TDS Central Processing Zone, Ghaziabad imposed fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per intimations u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as under:- Financial Quarter Amount levied u/s. 234E Date of intimation Year No. 2012-13 Q2 Rs. 11,250/- 20.11.2015 2012-13 Q3 Rs. 15

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

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

TDS Central Processing Zone, Ghaziabad imposed fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per intimations u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as under:- Financial Quarter Amount levied u/s. 234E Date of intimation Year No. 2012-13 Q2 Rs. 11,250/- 20.11.2015 2012-13 Q3 Rs. 15

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

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

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

TDS Central Processing Zone, Ghaziabad imposed fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per intimations u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as under:- Financial Quarter Amount levied u/s. 234E Date of intimation Year No. 2012-13 Q2 Rs. 11,250/- 20.11.2015 2012-13 Q3 Rs. 15

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

15 M/s.US Technology Resources Pvt.Ltd. 40(a)(ia) are clearly attracted. Another important factor to be noted is that the section 194J uses words `any sum’ in comparison to section 195 which uses term `any other sum chargeable under the provisions of this Act’. Thus section 194J presumes that some income is there in every sum paid

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

15 M/s.US Technology Resources Pvt.Ltd. 40(a)(ia) are clearly attracted. Another important factor to be noted is that the section 194J uses words `any sum’ in comparison to section 195 which uses term `any other sum chargeable under the provisions of this Act’. Thus section 194J presumes that some income is there in every sum paid

NAHAS HOSPITAL,PARAPPANANGADI vs. THE ACIT TDS, KOZHIKKODE

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

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Nahas Hospital Acit (Tds) (Osd) Pp/Xvll/191 Kozhiikode Vs. Parappanagadi Malappuram 676303 Pan –Aadfn5549C Appellant Respondent

TDS under the head Professional Charges under Section 194J of the Act but he uphold for the non-deduction of tax at source for payment of advertisement charges 3 M/s. Nahas Hospital under Section 194C of the Act,accordingly partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The learned D.R. strongly relied

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

Section 133(6) by the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kottayam be deleted. F. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not considered and answered the questions of law raised in the grounds of appeal, by a speaking order. G. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter vary and / or withdraw any or all the above grounds of appeal.” 3. The appeal filed

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. SRI. GEORGE MATHEW, COCHIN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuteam Sustain Cr Building Vs. Plot No. 71, Mra I.S. Press Rod Kakkanadu, Kochi 682030 Kochi 682018 Pan – Adwpm1819L Appellant Respondent

15-16 dated 15/02/2016 is opposed to law, weight of evidence, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) erred in deleting 2 Shri George Mathew the disallowance of Rs.1,73,32,803/ - made by the Assessing Officer u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for not effecting TDS from