VADAKKEVILA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

c) of the BR Act, 1949 on obtaining licence under section 22 of the said Act. Conclusion: In the instant case, although the appellant society is an apex co- operative society within the meaning of the State Act, 1984, it is not a co-operative bank within the meaning of section 5(b) read with section

M/S.ILAHIYA TRUST,MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT,(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal and stay application filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

5 SA No.31/Coch/2018 : M/s.Ilahia Trust. M/s.VUS Timbers for the purchase of timber. It was submitted that the medical college could not be constructed since no permission was granted, hence, the amount advanced to M/s.VUS Timbers was returned by account payee cheques. It was further stated that substantial portion of the advance paid to M/s.VUS Timbers was returned within a short

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

c) of the BR Act, 1949 on obtaining licence under Section 22 of the said Act. Conclusion: In the instant case, although the appellant society is an apex cooperative society within the meaning of the State Act, 1984, it is not a co-operative bank within the meaning of Section 5(b) read with Section

MR. RANJITH THAZHE KUNHAMBATH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, WARD 3(3), NON CORPORATE RANGE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee and the stay petition is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy S

TDS deducted and Page 5 of 7 the final tax demand as per the order under section 154 (page 33 of Paper Book) is Rs.292 and an interest on Rs.675/- resulting in a total demand of Rs.970/-. Before proceeding further, we will look at the provisions of section 271(1)(c

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

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

TDS u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. In the said order, the AO had also stated that penalty proceedings u/s. 270A(1) of the Act would be initiated separately. The AO had not specifically mentioned under which limb underreporting was done by the assessee in view of the above said facts and circumstances of the case. The AO further

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

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

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

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

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 u/s 201(1A) for non-deduction of TDS

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

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 u/s 201(1A) for non-deduction of TDS

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

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 u/s 201(1A) for non-deduction of TDS

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

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 u/s 201(1A) for non-deduction of TDS

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

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 u/s 201(1A) for non-deduction of TDS

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

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 u/s 201(1A) for non-deduction of TDS

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

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

section 201 of the Income Tax Act and ITNs 108,109,110, 111 and 112 of 2011 arise from the orders of penalty u/s.271 C. The assessment years involved are 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007 -08 and 2008-09. A copy of the High Court order, in ITA No.l05/2011 dated 10th day of August 2018, which is similar

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

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

section 201 of the Income Tax Act and ITNs 108,109,110, 111 and 112 of 2011 arise from the orders of penalty u/s.271 C. The assessment years involved are 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007 -08 and 2008-09. A copy of the High Court order, in ITA No.l05/2011 dated 10th day of August 2018, which is similar

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

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

section 201 of the Income Tax Act and ITNs 108,109,110, 111 and 112 of 2011 arise from the orders of penalty u/s.271 C. The assessment years involved are 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007 -08 and 2008-09. A copy of the High Court order, in ITA No.l05/2011 dated 10th day of August 2018, which is similar

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

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

section 201 of the Income Tax Act and ITNs 108,109,110, 111 and 112 of 2011 arise from the orders of penalty u/s.271 C. The assessment years involved are 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007 -08 and 2008-09. A copy of the High Court order, in ITA No.l05/2011 dated 10th day of August 2018, which is similar