BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

86 results for “TDS”+ Section 9(1)(vi)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,618Mumbai1,537Bangalore917Chennai438Kolkata264Ahmedabad179Jaipur167Karnataka155Hyderabad153Chandigarh132Raipur107Pune88Cochin86Indore86Surat53Lucknow40Visakhapatnam38Rajkot33Nagpur27Guwahati22Patna21Jodhpur19Telangana14Cuttack13SC11Dehradun9Agra7Amritsar6Kerala6Panaji6Varanasi5Jabalpur4Calcutta4Ranchi4Allahabad2J&K1Orissa1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 250119Section 206C35Section 115J26Section 4024TDS22Addition to Income19Section 206C(1)15Disallowance15Deduction14Section 143(3)

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

ITA 609/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35Section 43(1)Section 92C

1) of the Act. Accordingly, disallowed the claim for allowance as revenue expenditure of pre-operative expenditure ofRs.13,28,53,754/-. iv. Disallowance of excess claim of deduction u/s. 35(2AB) – The appellant company made claim for deduction of Rs. 80,28,91.589/- u/s. 35(2AB) of the Act as against the expenditure certified by DSIR

Showing 1–20 of 86 · Page 1 of 5

13
Section 80P11
Section 109

MR. PREM MUKUNDAN ,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD-2(2), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 790/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George George K. (Judicial Member), Ms. Padmavathy S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Padmanabhan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 192Section 199Section 250

9. In this regard, it is claimed that the assessee has filed the Declaration under Rule 37BA to claim the credit in his name. However the same would not be in conformity with Rule 37BA of the I.T. Rules, since the deductee has to file declaration and she had expired. At this juncture, we place reliance on the order

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 AND TPS, KANNUR vs. KANNUR BUILDING MATERIALS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, PAPPINISSERY, KANNUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue ITA No

ITA 600/COCH/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps .......... Appellant Aayakar Bhavban, Chovva P.O., Kannur 670006 Vs. Kannur Building Materials Co-Op. Society Ltd .......... Respondent No. C 1741, Pappinissery P.O., Kannur 670561 [Pan: Aaaak7151K]

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith P.J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 250Section 40Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

section 80(P)(2)(a)(vi) i.e., collective disposal of labour of the members of the society. 5.5 In this regard, based on the facts narrated above, I hold that the appellant is not eligible to claim 80(P)(2)(a)(vi) of the Act. 5.6 In Ground no. 4 of the appeal, appellant has taken the plea that

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

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 478/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms.Anoopa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 40Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

vi) Sixthly, the expression "providing credit facilities to its members" does not necessarily mean agricultural credit alone. It was highlighted that the distinction between eligibility for deduction and attributability of amount of profits and gains to an activity is a real one. Since profits and gains from credit facilities given 6 ITA No.478/Coch/2023. Vadakkevila SCB Ltd. to non-members cannot

ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS PRIVATE LTD,KOCHI vs. ITO (TDS) , KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 927/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 889/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 890/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 891/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 927/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 930/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. St. Alphonsa Timbers बनाम/ Ito (Tds) & Traders (Pvt.) Ltd. Kochi. Vs. Kundannoor, Maradu (Po), Ernakulam-682304. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamcs9963M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv) Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Of Ita. No. 889/Coch/2022 To Ita. No. 891/Coch/2022 Dated 22.08.2022 For Ay. 2010-11, Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15 Respectively. & Ita. No.927/Coch/2022 & 930/Coch/2022 Dated 05.09.2022 For Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15. Ita. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers & Traders Pvt. Ltd. First Of All, We Will Deal With Ita. No. 889 To 891/Coch/2022 Since The Issues Are Common, We Will Take Up Appeal For Ay. 2010-11 As The Lead Case & The Result Of Which Will Be Followed For Other Two Appeals Ie.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(7)

TDS), Kozhikode in ITA No. 118 to 120/Coch/2017 dated ITA. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders Pvt. Ltd. 11.09.2017 and ITAT Bengaluru Bench in the case of Lekshmi Saw Mills Vs. ITO, Bengaluru in ITA. No. 685 to 690/Beng/2013 dated 21.05.2014. According to Ld. AR, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. ITO (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 890/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 889/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 890/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 891/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 927/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 930/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. St. Alphonsa Timbers बनाम/ Ito (Tds) & Traders (Pvt.) Ltd. Kochi. Vs. Kundannoor, Maradu (Po), Ernakulam-682304. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamcs9963M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv) Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Of Ita. No. 889/Coch/2022 To Ita. No. 891/Coch/2022 Dated 22.08.2022 For Ay. 2010-11, Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15 Respectively. & Ita. No.927/Coch/2022 & 930/Coch/2022 Dated 05.09.2022 For Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15. Ita. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers & Traders Pvt. Ltd. First Of All, We Will Deal With Ita. No. 889 To 891/Coch/2022 Since The Issues Are Common, We Will Take Up Appeal For Ay. 2010-11 As The Lead Case & The Result Of Which Will Be Followed For Other Two Appeals Ie.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(7)

TDS), Kozhikode in ITA No. 118 to 120/Coch/2017 dated ITA. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders Pvt. Ltd. 11.09.2017 and ITAT Bengaluru Bench in the case of Lekshmi Saw Mills Vs. ITO, Bengaluru in ITA. No. 685 to 690/Beng/2013 dated 21.05.2014. According to Ld. AR, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. ITO (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 889/COCH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 889/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 890/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 891/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 927/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 930/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. St. Alphonsa Timbers बनाम/ Ito (Tds) & Traders (Pvt.) Ltd. Kochi. Vs. Kundannoor, Maradu (Po), Ernakulam-682304. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamcs9963M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv) Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Of Ita. No. 889/Coch/2022 To Ita. No. 891/Coch/2022 Dated 22.08.2022 For Ay. 2010-11, Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15 Respectively. & Ita. No.927/Coch/2022 & 930/Coch/2022 Dated 05.09.2022 For Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15. Ita. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers & Traders Pvt. Ltd. First Of All, We Will Deal With Ita. No. 889 To 891/Coch/2022 Since The Issues Are Common, We Will Take Up Appeal For Ay. 2010-11 As The Lead Case & The Result Of Which Will Be Followed For Other Two Appeals Ie.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(7)

TDS), Kozhikode in ITA No. 118 to 120/Coch/2017 dated ITA. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders Pvt. Ltd. 11.09.2017 and ITAT Bengaluru Bench in the case of Lekshmi Saw Mills Vs. ITO, Bengaluru in ITA. No. 685 to 690/Beng/2013 dated 21.05.2014. According to Ld. AR, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS PRIVATE LTD,KOCHI vs. ITO(TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 930/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 889/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 890/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 891/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 927/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 930/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. St. Alphonsa Timbers बनाम/ Ito (Tds) & Traders (Pvt.) Ltd. Kochi. Vs. Kundannoor, Maradu (Po), Ernakulam-682304. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamcs9963M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv) Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Of Ita. No. 889/Coch/2022 To Ita. No. 891/Coch/2022 Dated 22.08.2022 For Ay. 2010-11, Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15 Respectively. & Ita. No.927/Coch/2022 & 930/Coch/2022 Dated 05.09.2022 For Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15. Ita. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers & Traders Pvt. Ltd. First Of All, We Will Deal With Ita. No. 889 To 891/Coch/2022 Since The Issues Are Common, We Will Take Up Appeal For Ay. 2010-11 As The Lead Case & The Result Of Which Will Be Followed For Other Two Appeals Ie.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(7)

TDS), Kozhikode in ITA No. 118 to 120/Coch/2017 dated ITA. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders Pvt. Ltd. 11.09.2017 and ITAT Bengaluru Bench in the case of Lekshmi Saw Mills Vs. ITO, Bengaluru in ITA. No. 685 to 690/Beng/2013 dated 21.05.2014. According to Ld. AR, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. ITO (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 891/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 889/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 890/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 891/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 927/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 930/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. St. Alphonsa Timbers बनाम/ Ito (Tds) & Traders (Pvt.) Ltd. Kochi. Vs. Kundannoor, Maradu (Po), Ernakulam-682304. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aamcs9963M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv) Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Of Ita. No. 889/Coch/2022 To Ita. No. 891/Coch/2022 Dated 22.08.2022 For Ay. 2010-11, Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15 Respectively. & Ita. No.927/Coch/2022 & 930/Coch/2022 Dated 05.09.2022 For Ay. 2011-12 & Ay. 2014-15. Ita. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers & Traders Pvt. Ltd. First Of All, We Will Deal With Ita. No. 889 To 891/Coch/2022 Since The Issues Are Common, We Will Take Up Appeal For Ay. 2010-11 As The Lead Case & The Result Of Which Will Be Followed For Other Two Appeals Ie.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rajeev, (Adv)For Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)
Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 206C(7)

TDS), Kozhikode in ITA No. 118 to 120/Coch/2017 dated ITA. Nos 927 & 930/Coch/2022. A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 Mr. St. Alphonsa Timbers and Traders Pvt. Ltd. 11.09.2017 and ITAT Bengaluru Bench in the case of Lekshmi Saw Mills Vs. ITO, Bengaluru in ITA. No. 685 to 690/Beng/2013 dated 21.05.2014. According to Ld. AR, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KASARAGOD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 439/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

BATHX BATHWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHIN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL IRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 437/COCH/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

RUCHIT PARIMAL ASHAR,SANALA ROAD, MORBI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 505/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

A B C SALES CORPORATION ,KANNUR vs. ITO, CIRCLE-1, KANNUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 404/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

BATHX BATHWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHIN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 436/COCH/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 440/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 441/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 458/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

K.ABDUL VAHEED,TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 504/COCH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

ABC BUILDWARE INDIA (P) LIMITED,KANNUR vs. ITO, CIRCLE-1, KANNUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 389/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 457/COCH/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 250

9,22,75,684/- was made arbitrarily without due inquiry and consideration of the explanation provided by the assessee. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee on this ground and direct the deletion of the addition. 55.1 Therefore, considering the fact that the addition on account of the variance in stock was made solely based