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

9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.580/Coch/2018 is dismissed. ITA No.581/Coch/2018 : Asst.Year 2013-2014: 10. The grounds raised in the above appeal read as follows:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Thiruvananthapuram ("CIT(A)") has erred in disallowing the deduction claimed

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.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

TDS in terms of sec. 40a(ia) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 99- 100/C/ 2017 4. After hearing both the parties, we find that a similar issue came up for consideration before this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in I.T.A. No. 222/Coch/2013 for the AY 2007-08. The Tribunal vide order dated 29/07/2017 held as under: “16. We have

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

TDS in terms of sec. 40a(ia) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 99- 100/C/ 2017 4. After hearing both the parties, we find that a similar issue came up for consideration before this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in I.T.A. No. 222/Coch/2013 for the AY 2007-08. The Tribunal vide order dated 29/07/2017 held as under: “16. We have

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

TDS in terms of sec. 40a(ia) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 99- 100/C/ 2017 4. After hearing both the parties, we find that a similar issue came up for consideration before this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in I.T.A. No. 222/Coch/2013 for the AY 2007-08. The Tribunal vide order dated 29/07/2017 held as under: “16. We have

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

TDS in terms of sec. 40a(ia) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 99- 100/C/ 2017 4. After hearing both the parties, we find that a similar issue came up for consideration before this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in I.T.A. No. 222/Coch/2013 for the AY 2007-08. The Tribunal vide order dated 29/07/2017 held as under: “16. We have

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

TDS in terms of sec. 40a(ia) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos. 99- 100/C/ 2017 4. After hearing both the parties, we find that a similar issue came up for consideration before this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in I.T.A. No. 222/Coch/2013 for the AY 2007-08. The Tribunal vide order dated 29/07/2017 held as under: “16. We have

M/S.VIJAYA PALACE,,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

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

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

TDS. So far as the argument of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that direction may be given to the Assessing Officer to allow such disallowance made in this year in the order of the subsequent years, we hold that the assessee may move appropriate application before the Assessing Officer who shall decide the issue as per fact 5 I.T.A

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

9. The next question arises for consideration is whether the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) as incorporated by Finance Act, 2012 is retrospective in operation or prospective in operation. We are conscious that some of the benches of this Tribunal in the country has taken the view that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) is retrospective

P. SURENDRAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm P. Surendran Sukanya Bhavan Asst. Cit-1(2) Vadayakkadu, Kunnukuzhy, P.O., Thiruvananthapuram Vs. Thiruvananthapuram-695 035

40A(3) would apply in computing the income under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession” and “Income from other sources” as per section 58(2). All payments in excess of Rs.2,500 at one time whether for goods or services obtained for cash or 6 P. Surendran Sukanya Bhavan vs. Asst. CIT credit, which are deductible

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

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 40A(3) of the Act. The assessee challenged the said disallowances before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) has not accepted the case of the assessee and dismissed the appeal. Therefore, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal on the following grounds: ITA Nos.74 to 77/Coch/2024 Thanseer Kaja, Kerala Page

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 40A(3) of the Act. The assessee challenged the said disallowances before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) has not accepted the case of the assessee and dismissed the appeal. Therefore, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal on the following grounds: ITA Nos.74 to 77/Coch/2024 Thanseer Kaja, Kerala Page

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 40A(3) of the Act. The assessee challenged the said disallowances before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) has not accepted the case of the assessee and dismissed the appeal. Therefore, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal on the following grounds: ITA Nos.74 to 77/Coch/2024 Thanseer Kaja, Kerala Page

TANSEER KAJA,KARINGARAPULLY vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, PALAKKAD

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

section 40A(3) of the Act. The assessee challenged the said disallowances before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) has not accepted the case of the assessee and dismissed the appeal. Therefore, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal on the following grounds: ITA Nos.74 to 77/Coch/2024 Thanseer Kaja, Kerala Page

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

TORRY HARRIS SEA FOODS LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT, ALAPPUZHA

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

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

9. The facts of the case are that the assessee had paid Rs.18,02,939/- as EIA monitoring fee to Export Inspection Agency. The assessee had not deducted tax at source on this payment. Since the Export Inspection Agencies are autonomous I.T.(TP)A. No./447C/2016 bodies established by the Central Government under the (Export Quality Control &Inspection