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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

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

40A(9) of the Act, the claim of deduction made for any payment to superannuation fund must be in accordance with section 36(1)(iv) and 36(1)(v) of the Act. Since the assessee has not been able to prove that it is a recognized provident fund or an approved gratuity fund as mentioned in section

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

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

40A(9) of the Act, the claim of deduction made for any payment to superannuation fund must be in accordance with section 36(1)(iv) and 36(1)(v) of the Act. Since the assessee has not been able to prove that it is a recognized provident fund or an approved gratuity fund as mentioned in section

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

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the amount of Rs.46,43,961 paid to Primary banks by erroneously treating the said payment as commission and disallowing the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS without considering the fact that the said

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

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the amount of Rs.46,43,961 paid to Primary banks by erroneously treating the said payment as commission and disallowing the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS without considering the fact that the said

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

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the amount of Rs.46,43,961 paid to Primary banks by erroneously treating the said payment as commission and disallowing the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS without considering the fact that the said

M/S.ST.GEORGE MOTORS,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ITO, WD-4, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri George George K

40A(3) 92760 Cash payment 3. Audit fee 45000 TDS not deducted 4. Remuneration paid to 136937 Not working Mrs.Neethu partner 5. Remuneration paid to working 705754 40(b)(ii) & partner 40(b)(v) 4. Aggrieved by the assessment completed, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition totaling to Rs.11

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 cannot be made. Sec. 40(a)(ia) cannot be interpreted to mean that it applies only to amounts "paid" and not to those "payable", 3) The second proviso to sec. 40(a) (ia) though beneficial to the tax payers, can be claimed only if the condition under proviso to sec. 201(1) is not met. Since the asessee falls

INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 26.12.2019. The AO assessed the total income at Rs.16,27,30,080/- after making the addition of Rs.2,83,80,844/- under Section 40A(ia) for disallowance of expenses where TDS

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

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS while making payments. Similarly, ld. AO disallowed the payments made to the various parties in cash on a single day exceeding Rs.20,000/- since the same is not in accordance with section 40A(3

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS while making payments. Similarly, ld. AO disallowed the payments made to the various parties in cash on a single day exceeding Rs.20,000/- since the same is not in accordance with section 40A(3

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS while making payments. Similarly, ld. AO disallowed the payments made to the various parties in cash on a single day exceeding Rs.20,000/- since the same is not in accordance with section 40A(3

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS while making payments. Similarly, ld. AO disallowed the payments made to the various parties in cash on a single day exceeding Rs.20,000/- since the same is not in accordance with section 40A(3

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

40A(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

GRASS ASSOCIATES PVT LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ITO,CORP.WARD-13), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 08.12.2011 for assessment year 2009-10. 2. The brief facts leading to the instant appeal are that the Assessing Officer (AO) in assessment proceedings queried the assessee in respect of the expenditure claimed in the sum of Rs.37.43 lakh under the account head ‘repossession charges’. The assessee-company

M/S.ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, ground Nos

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

40a(i)/(ia) also. AO is free to inform the concerned TDS authorities regarding non deduction of Tax at source by the assessee at the relevant time of making provision, so that appropriate action can be taken by such authorities for such default. Considering above, the objections of the assessee are not accepted.” 3.2 Aggrieved by the order

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are

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

3. The first common ground in all the appeals is with regard to the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the tax levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act on account of consulting services as there is no deduction of TDS in terms of sec. 40a(ia) of the Act. I.T.A

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are

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

3. The first common ground in all the appeals is with regard to the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the tax levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T. Act on account of consulting services as there is no deduction of TDS in terms of sec. 40a(ia) of the Act. I.T.A