INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. MUTHOOT HEALTH CARE PRIVATE LIMITED, KOZHENCHERRY

Accordingly, we decline to interfere with the same. Thus, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

TDS under Section 192, or 'professional fees' taxable under Section 28, requiring TDS under Section 194J. The determination hinges on whether

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

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 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"

28 to 41 of the Act. Therefore, the fact that the said definition has been found necessary means that in normal parlance “plant” does not include “ship” even sections 32A and 33 of the Act clearly differentiate ships, machinery and plant. 14. having examined clause(c ) Explanation-Ill of section 194-C, it, prima facie, clarifies that the expression “work

SRI.ABDUL KAREEM,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO, ALUVA

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

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

TDS of Rs.88,29,502 as refund. The assessment was taken up for scrutiny by issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T.Act and the assessment u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act was completed vide order dated 11.11.2016 on a total income of Rs.4,16,014. 4. Subsequently the CIT by invoking his revisionary powers issued notice

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

section 43A of the Act, it is claimed that the amount of loss debited to Profit & Loss A/c. for the assessment year 2012-13 is reversed by crediting to Profit & Loss A/c. for the assessment year under consideration. This amount was claimed as deduction while computing taxable income. The AO, placing reliance on the decision of the Tribunal in assessee

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

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 27.10.2017 without any adjustment to the loss as returned. o) The reason for initiation

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

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

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.KUNNEL ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS P. LTD, KOCHI

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

28 of that previous year in which such sum is actually paid by him 3.5 The Ld. AR submitted that from a plain reading of section 43B it is apparent that the deductions are available to an assessee only when it is a deduction otherwise allowable under the Act. In the present case, it was submitted that service

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since the same was not made based

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since the same was not made based

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since the same was not made based

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS. We find that the said amount was added based on the figures found place in the books of account and not based on the incriminating materials seized during the search. Therefore, when the AO made an assessment u/s. 153C of the Act, he cannot make addition u/s. 68 or 69 since the same was not made based

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 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.VIJAYA HOSPITALITY AND RESORTS LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ADCIT(TDS), COCHIN

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

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

section 271C(1)(b) (failure to remit the tax deducted at source), despite the fact that it may be a more serious default, than the failure to deduct the tax at source.” 9.4 In the instant case, the major part of the TDS relates to remuneration to the Directors credited to the unsecured loan account. However, the TDS was payable

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

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

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

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

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

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

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

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

TDS) (2012) 28 taxmann.com 25 (Coch) 4. Allahabad Bank v. ITO in ITA No.5992 to 5994/Del/2012 of Delhi Bench of ITAT. The above supports the following ground No.2 raised in the appeal memorandum.” 6.2 The above contention of the assessee in short is that there should be proceedings against the deductee/payee and the finding to be rendered by the revenue