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

NEW KABLE POINT,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

TDS had not been deducted, from the interest paid to suppliers. The disallowance amounts to Rs 93,048/, which had been clearly disallowed in the total income statement. The interest paid to bank and the sales tax department are allowable expenses. So, the additions of Rs 3,35,961/ made by the assessing authority and that retained

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.MATHAI XAVIER, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.E.M.PAUL, EDAKATTUKUDIYIL, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ACIT, CIR-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.JOSE MATHEW, M/S.E.V.MTHAI & SONS, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

SRI.ESSA ISMAIL SAIT,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT,CIR-2(1),, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ITO, WARD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.MARTIN JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.E.J.SONY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THEACIT, CIR-1(1),EKM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.E.M.JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.TOMY MATHEW PARTNER OF MATHAI SONS, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

Section 147 on the differential total income of Rs.3,88,83,800/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who confirmed the order of assessment. The matter was carried in appeal to the Tribunal and by the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, accepting the sale value as returned

A & B ASSOCIATES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by directing the AO to -

87,873 was deducted as TDS. As the business was not profitable, and for some other major reasons, the relationship between the partners was substantially damaged and the partners had lost confidence between them. After some preliminary legal steps, they have decided to dissolve the firm and 4 A&B Associates accordingly, the firm was dissolved w.e.f. 05/07/2018

THE ITO, WD-5, PALAKKAD vs. M/S.THEPERUMATTY SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD, PALAKKAD

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

87,797/- in respect of interest paid to the depositors. 10. The Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed the interest paid to the depositors invoking section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act., since the assessee has not deducted TDS

M/S.KADUNA HOSPITALITY P. LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

section 32(2), amounting to Rs.5,67,2047-, against the short term capital gain for AY 2013-14;. The appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and craves to leave or add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal. 3. The assessee has also filed

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL ,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT , TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL ,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT , TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

M/S.KERALA FEEDS LTD,THRISSUR vs. ITO, TRICHUR

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Kerala Feeds Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Department, Kallettumkara, Irinjalakunda, National Faceless Appeal Thrissur – 680 683. Centre (Nfac). Pan : Aaack 9796 N Ito (Tds), Thrissur. Appellant Respondent

TDS by the assessee. However, the CIT(A) has though admitted that the claim of the assessee needs factual examination, concluded the assessment without examining the facts of the case and rejected the appeal of the assessee. The learned DR relied on the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record

DCIT, KANNUR vs. M/S MANJOO & CO.,, KANNUR

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year: 2006-07

TDS certificates is Rs, 1,19,480/- whereas interest income returned is Rs. 46,560/-. The difference in this respect is Rs. 72,920/- 3. Loss claimed on account of tampered prize winning tickets of Rs. 2,38,270/- which has been allowed without any concrete evidence. 4. Loss claimed due to riot is Rs.1 87,693/- without any substantial