THE KAREEPPA PANCHAYATH SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.D,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2017-18

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) and permissible deduction of interest income is limited to Co-operative Societies/Banks registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act under clause (d) of the Act and effect order on the above lines is made by the Assessing Officer. The questions are accordingly answered.” 5. We adopt the above detailed discussion mutatis mutandis in the case

PALLATH NAFEESA,MALAPPURAM vs. ITO, TIRUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Pallath Nafeesa The Income Tax Officer Poolakkodan House Tirur Athirumada, Punnathala Vs. Tirur, Malappuram 676552 [Pan: Alipn9300R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS reported in70 taxmann.com 45. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Bench is extracted as under: “10. In the facts of the present case, it is an admitted position that the interest on which the tax is sought to be deducted at source under section 194A of the Act is interest under section

EDARIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,EDARIKODE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) (TDS) KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

2. Provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) are not attracted for short deduction of TDS on salary because the appellant had deducted the TDS on a bona fide estimate of the tax liability of the employees. 3. Interest computation u/s 201(1A) for short deduction of TDS on salary is erroneous. 4. Interest computation

EDARIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,EDARIKODE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) (TDS) KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

2. Provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) are not attracted for short deduction of TDS on salary because the appellant had deducted the TDS on a bona fide estimate of the tax liability of the employees. 3. Interest computation u/s 201(1A) for short deduction of TDS on salary is erroneous. 4. Interest computation

EDARIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,EDARIKODE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) (TDS) KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

2. Provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) are not attracted for short deduction of TDS on salary because the appellant had deducted the TDS on a bona fide estimate of the tax liability of the employees. 3. Interest computation u/s 201(1A) for short deduction of TDS on salary is erroneous. 4. Interest computation

EDARIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,MALAPPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

2. Provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) are not attracted for short deduction of TDS on salary because the appellant had deducted the TDS on a bona fide estimate of the tax liability of the employees. 3. Interest computation u/s 201(1A) for short deduction of TDS on salary is erroneous. 4. Interest computation

EDARIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,EDARIKODE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) (TDS) KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

2. Provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) are not attracted for short deduction of TDS on salary because the appellant had deducted the TDS on a bona fide estimate of the tax liability of the employees. 3. Interest computation u/s 201(1A) for short deduction of TDS on salary is erroneous. 4. Interest computation

EDARIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,MALAPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

2. Provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) are not attracted for short deduction of TDS on salary because the appellant had deducted the TDS on a bona fide estimate of the tax liability of the employees. 3. Interest computation u/s 201(1A) for short deduction of TDS on salary is erroneous. 4. Interest computation

SHRI SURESH GEORGE,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ADIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-3, THIRUVANATHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkeysuresh George Asstt. Director Of Income Tax Kurichyiel House International Taxation Payippad, Harippad Vs. Thiruvananthapuram Alappuzha 690 556 [Pan:Affpg5853B]

section 4 r.w.s. 5(2)(a) of the Act, but to the same provision/s as the income of which it is a part. There is, as such, no scope for bringing the tax deducted at source (rs. 22.12 lacs) on the impugned sum to tax even as it is without doubt received in India in Indian currency. Further

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)

2 Shri Prem Mukundan been deducted and hence he was eligible for TDS credit on the said income. 4. The Assessing Officer has failed to understand that the assessee is being penalized for no fault of his. 5. The Assessing Officer has not considered the valid explanation submitted by the Assessee in this regard.” 3. The brief facts

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

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

5) The amount referred to in sub-section (4) shall be deemed to be amount of income under-reported for the preceding year in the following order— Page 7 of 14 (a) the preceding year immediately before the year in which the receipt, deposit or investment appears, being the first preceding year; and (b) where the amount added or deducted

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]

section 80(P)(2)(a)(vi) i.e., collective disposal of labour of the members of the society. 5.5 In this regard, based on the facts narrated above, I hold that the appellant is not eligible to claim 80(P)(2)(a)(vi) of the Act. 5.6 In Ground no. 4 of the appeal, appellant has taken the plea that

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 272A(2)(c) of the Act. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed Order pronounced in the open court on 5th November, 2020. (George Mathan) Judicial Member Cochin, Dated: 5th November, 2020 Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) -Kottayam, 4. The CIT - (TDS), Kochi, 5

ELAVANCHALIL ABDUL BASHEER,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOZHIKODE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Assessment Year: 2020-21 Elavanchalil Abdul Basheer .......... Appellant Oittannmakm, Koduvally, Kozhikode 673572 [Pan: Bbwpb4939D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri C.B.M. Warrier, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.05.2024 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 23.02.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual Deriving Income Under The Head ‘Agriculture’. The Return Of Income For Ay 2020-21 Was Filed On 21.12.2020 Declaring Income Of Rs. 4,60,00,000/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Kozhokode

5,09,24,950/- on sale of following agricultural land: - Sl. No. Agricultural Income Date of sale Amount 1 Property: 1 04.12.2019 28,11,250 Re Survey Number 159/4 Thrikkaipetta village, Meppadi, Wayanad 2 Property: 2 10.02.2020 3,93,700 Survey Number 143/34 Kattippara Village, Thamarassery, Kozhikode 3 Property: 3 02.04.2019 4,64,10,000 Re Survey Number 90/3 Thrikaipetta

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

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

2)(a)(i) of the Act and also by disallowing of section 40(a)(ia) deduction. The disallowance of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was done on the ground that the assessee had not collected TDS for the amount paid to the collection agents and for the maintenance charges which amounts to Rs.8,07,914/-. The deduction

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

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

2)(a)(i) of the Act and also by disallowing of section 40(a)(ia) deduction. The disallowance of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was done on the ground that the assessee had not collected TDS for the amount paid to the collection agents and for the maintenance charges which amounts to Rs.8,07,914/-. The deduction

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

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

2)(a)(i) of the Act and also by disallowing of section 40(a)(ia) deduction. The disallowance of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was done on the ground that the assessee had not collected TDS for the amount paid to the collection agents and for the maintenance charges which amounts to Rs.8,07,914/-. The deduction

M/S. NEDUMATTOM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,IDUKKI vs. THE ITO, THODUPIZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

5. The learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the PCIT. 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The PCIT had primarily issued notice u/s 263 of the I.T.Act for the reason that interest income received from M/s.Idukki District Co-op Bank Ltd. was not entitled to deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the I.T.Act

M/S.KERALA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Kerala State Warehousing Vs Acit, Corporate Circle 1(2) Corporation Is Press Road Kochi 682018 Pb No. 1727, Warehousing Corporation Road Ernakulam 682016 Pan – Aabck1583G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Gopi, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shantam Bose, Cit Dr

2)(b) reported in audit report and ITR - High Ratio of refund of TDS - Large other expenses claimed in the Profit and Loss Account. n) The Assessing officer after examining reasons for selecting the return for limited scrutiny based on the records and submissions made by the assessee accepted the return and completed the Limited scrutiny by order dated