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

154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 or an order of the Settlement Commission under sub-section (4) of section 245D, the amount on which interest was payable under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) has been increased or reduced, as the case

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

154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 or an order of the Settlement Commission under sub-section (4) of section 245D, the amount on which interest was payable under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) has been increased or reduced, as the case

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

154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 or an order of the Settlement Commission under sub-section (4) of section 245D, the amount on which interest was payable under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) has been increased or reduced, as the case

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

154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 or an order of the Settlement Commission under sub-section (4) of section 245D, the amount on which interest was payable under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) has been increased or reduced, as the case

MARIAMMA JOSEPH,KOTTAYAMN vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is decided on the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasmariamma Joseph Asst. Cit, Central Circle Hotel Floral Park Kottayam 686001 Gandhinagar Vs. Kottayam 686008 [Pan:Accpj9135F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

154 dated 14.02.2019. 2. The issue arising in the instant case is the manner of computing the interest liable to be levied u/s. 234B of the Act consequent to the appellate order dated 16/2/2016, i.e., on giving appeal effect, which in the instant case was vide order dated 04/5/2016. As per the assessee, her returned income

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 is only compensatory and not penal in nature. The learned AR also submitted that the AO has initiated proceeding under section 154

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)

section 154 of the Act ought to have been entertained by the Revenue. 10. In this regard, learned DR also made submission that the decision of the ITAT, Jaipur Bench, was in relation to provisions of Rule 37BA of the Rules which is applicable to TDS

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

TDS passed an order u/s 154 r.w.s. 200A of the Act on 28.01.2016, raising a total demand of Rs.11,160/- A.Y. 2013-14 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.9,153/- on account of late filing fee u/s 234E & Rs.2,002/- as Interest u/s 220(2) of the Act thereon).” 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS & TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

TDS passed an order u/s 154 r.w.s. 200A of the Act on 28.01.2016, raising a total demand of Rs.11,160/- A.Y. 2013-14 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.9,153/- on account of late filing fee u/s 234E & Rs.2,002/- as Interest u/s 220(2) of the Act thereon).” 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action

M/S. POYANIL HOSPITAL,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE ITO, TDS, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year :2013-14 M/S.Poyanil Hospital, Ito, Vs. Poyanil, Tds, Kozhencherry. Alappuzha. Pan :Aacfm 7322 F Assessee Respondent

TDS) passed intimation under section 154 r.w.s. 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’), levying a late

M/S CEECON READYMIX CONCRETE PVT LTD,THRISSUR vs. ITO TDS RANGE, THRISSUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed on the afore-said terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

154 read with section 200A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” hereinafter), dated 19.12.2019 and 27.12.2019 for the financial years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 respectively, by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his orders of even dated, i.e., 27.10.2022, incorrectly stating the relevant years as assessment years, as also the section

M/S CEECON READYMIX CONCRETE PVT LTD,THRISSUR vs. ITO TDS RANGE, THRISSUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed on the afore-said terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

154 read with section 200A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” hereinafter), dated 19.12.2019 and 27.12.2019 for the financial years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 respectively, by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [CIT(A)] vide his orders of even dated, i.e., 27.10.2022, incorrectly stating the relevant years as assessment years, as also the section

KILKOTAGIRI AND THIRUMBADI PLANTATIONS LTD,CALICUT vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE-2(1) , KOZHIKODE

In the result, the grounds of appeal filed for the A

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. Insofar as the third dispute of disallowance of bonus, the Ld.CIT(A) accepted the case of the assessee and allowed the same. 4. As against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal for A.Y. 2012-13: Page 3 of 6 ITA Nos. 369 to 371/Coch/2023 “1) The main

KILKOTAGIRI AND THIRUMBADI PLANTATIONS LTD,CALICUT vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE-2(1) , KOZHIKODE

In the result, the grounds of appeal filed for the A

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. Insofar as the third dispute of disallowance of bonus, the Ld.CIT(A) accepted the case of the assessee and allowed the same. 4. As against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal for A.Y. 2012-13: Page 3 of 6 ITA Nos. 369 to 371/Coch/2023 “1) The main

KILKOTAGIRI AND THIRUMBADI PLANTATIONS LTD,CALICUT vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE-2(1) , KOZHIKODE

In the result, the grounds of appeal filed for the A

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. Insofar as the third dispute of disallowance of bonus, the Ld.CIT(A) accepted the case of the assessee and allowed the same. 4. As against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal for A.Y. 2012-13: Page 3 of 6 ITA Nos. 369 to 371/Coch/2023 “1) The main

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS returns for the period prior to 01.06.2015 were invalid and were to be set aside. Therefore, going by the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India (supra), the levy of late fee for the various quarters for financial years

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS returns for the period prior to 01.06.2015 were invalid and were to be set aside. Therefore, going by the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India (supra), the levy of late fee for the various quarters for financial years

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS returns for the period prior to 01.06.2015 were invalid and were to be set aside. Therefore, going by the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India (supra), the levy of late fee for the various quarters for financial years

MRS SHABANA AKBAR,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO WARD 1(4), KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2017-18

section 194H and also issued credit notes. When appellant pointed out that the TDS provisions are not applicable on such incentives, the principal stopped deducting TDS from June 2018. It was not correct for the Commissioner (Appeals). NFAC to ignore the purchase agreement and credit notes filed by the appellant in support of the claim and confirm the addition made