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

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

90,917/- u/s 40(a)(ia) being payment of interest on borrowed funds from firms in which appellant is a partner without TDS u/s 194A. The Ld. AR submitted that 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

90,334. The Assessing Officer disallowed the same on the ground that the Appellant is not eligible to claim the same. During the appeal proceedings, the learned AR has argued that the Appellant is eligible for deduction under section 80P of the Act. The arguments of the learned AR are ITA Nos.566-567/Coch/2018 4 SA No.44-45/Coch/2018. M/s.Kerala State Co-op Agri

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

90,334. The Assessing Officer disallowed the same on the ground that the Appellant is not eligible to claim the same. During the appeal proceedings, the learned AR has argued that the Appellant is eligible for deduction under section 80P of the Act. The arguments of the learned AR are ITA Nos.566-567/Coch/2018 4 SA No.44-45/Coch/2018. M/s.Kerala State Co-op Agri

ADCIT, THRISSUR vs. THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD,, TRICHUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal stands allowed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.635 /Coch/2017 Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. The Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), St. Mary’S College Road, Thrissur. Thrissur-680020. [Pan: Aabct 0024D]

90 in place of sections 214, 243 and 244, it was held that the assessee is entitled to interest u/s. 244A of the Act on the excess self-assessment tax paid u/s. 140A of the Act and observed as under: I.T.A. No.635/C/2017 “In sub-section (1) to section 244A where refund of any amount becomes due to the assessee

M/S AC CARGO MANAGEMENT P.LTD,,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 320/Coch/2013. िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. Vs. M/S. Ac Cargo Management The Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward 1(1) 1St Floor, Chacko Chambers, Kochi Civil Lines Road, Palarivattom, Kochi 682 025. [Pan Aaeca 2206K] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

TDS and the assessee had failed to effect such deductions. According to him, lower authorities were justified in applying Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. :- 6 -: 7. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. It would be apposite to have look at the MOU entered by the assessee for leasing the Containarized

MARIAMMA JOSEPH,KOTTAYAMN vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is decided on the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasmariamma Joseph Asst. Cit, Central Circle Hotel Floral Park Kottayam 686001 Gandhinagar Vs. Kottayam 686008 [Pan:Accpj9135F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS, Adv. Tax or self-assessment tax is deemed to be given.’ The same stood confirmed in first appeal; the ld. CIT(A) holding as: ‘In the present case, assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was passed for the A.Y 2010-11 on 28.3.2013. The appellate order was passed on 16.2.2016. The order of the Assessing Officer merged with

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

90 to 92/Coch/2022 A.Ys. 2013-14 to AY. 2015-16 M/s. Edavannakkad Service Co-op. of Rs.58,860/- after claiming deduction of Rs.15,09,160/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. And the Assessing Officer had completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act by order dated 07.01.2016 by finalizing the total income at Rs.23

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

90 to 92/Coch/2022 A.Ys. 2013-14 to AY. 2015-16 M/s. Edavannakkad Service Co-op. of Rs.58,860/- after claiming deduction of Rs.15,09,160/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. And the Assessing Officer had completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act by order dated 07.01.2016 by finalizing the total income at Rs.23

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

90 to 92/Coch/2022 A.Ys. 2013-14 to AY. 2015-16 M/s. Edavannakkad Service Co-op. of Rs.58,860/- after claiming deduction of Rs.15,09,160/- u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. And the Assessing Officer had completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act by order dated 07.01.2016 by finalizing the total income at Rs.23

M/S. MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS(INDIA) P.LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

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

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

90,000 under section 36(1 )(iii) is not correct. Moreover , the assessment for the earlier years were completed under section 143(3), of which two years was done by the same AO accepting the appellant's argument of commercial expediency and the disallowance under section 36(1 )(iii) was not made. It is submitted that the assessing officer should

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

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 SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

90 on account of tax paid in a country outside India; (iv) any relief of tax allowed under section 90A on account of tax paid in a specified territory outside India referred to in that section; (v) any deduction, from the Indian income-tax payable, allowed under section 91, on account of tax paid in a country outside India