THE ITO,, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.EXTRAWEAVE P. LTD, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Extraweave Pvt. Ltd. Arattukulangara Complex 264B/Cmc 1 Vs. A.N. Puram, Alapuzha 688011 Sakteeswara Junction Cherthala 688524 Pan – Aabce5438L Appellant Respondent

loss of Rs. 3,36,17,037/- carried forward from previous years. 6. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. 3 M/s. Extraweave Pvt. Ltd. Patspin India Limited (245 CTR 97 (Ker.) has held that the business profit is to be computed necessarily after setting off unabsorbed depreciation carried forward from previous years. For these

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

set off the loss, if any, against the additional/ enhanced compensation that was to be received in the subsequent years. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the total amount received in the assessment year 2013-14 ought to have been brought to tax in the same year. 4.3 To the above proposal, the assessee filed objections

NAHAS HOSPITAL,PARAPPANANGADI vs. THE ACIT TDS, KOZHIKKODE

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

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Nahas Hospital Acit (Tds) (Osd) Pp/Xvll/191 Kozhiikode Vs. Parappanagadi Malappuram 676303 Pan –Aadfn5549C Appellant Respondent

set aside the assessment order as arbitrary and the appeal allowed.” 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, we proceeded to dispose of the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee. 3. The brief facts of the case are that a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") was conducted by the Income

ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K, Jm

set off of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation loss. While doing so, the AO made disallowance of Rs. 1,07,06,000/- being the amount of interest on delayed payment of TDS

M/S.KERALA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Kerala State Warehousing Vs Acit, Corporate Circle 1(2) Corporation Is Press Road Kochi 682018 Pb No. 1727, Warehousing Corporation Road Ernakulam 682016 Pan – Aabck1583G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Gopi, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shantam Bose, Cit Dr

TDS - Large other expenses claimed in the Profit and Loss Account. n) The Assessing officer after examining reasons for selecting the return for limited scrutiny based on the records and submissions made by the assessee accepted the return and completed the Limited scrutiny by order dated 27.10.2017 without any adjustment to the loss as returned. o) The reason for initiation

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

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

setting up of new plant at Chennai. In the books of account, the appellant company had capitalised the pre- operative expenditure. However, in the return of income it is claimed as revenue expenditure placing reliance on the following decisions: - 4 Apollo Tyres Ltd. - Bell Ceramics Ltd. v. DCIT 2016 – TIOL-1688-HC-AHM- IT (Gujarat) - Jay Engineering Works

MS/ASHLY ALUMINIUM P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, TRIVANDRUM

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Ashly Aluminium P. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer T.C. 38/2397(7) Ward – 1(1) Mundackal Chambers Trivandrum Vs. Aryasalai Trivandrum 695036

loss of revenue to the department. 4. The CIT(A) erred in placing reliance on the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh Kourani Vs. UOI reported in 83 taxman.com 137 (2017), Rashmikant Kundalia Vs. UOI reported in 54 taxman.com 200 (Bombay) and Biswajit Das Vs. UOI [2019] 103 taxman.com 290/264 taxman 41/413 ITR 9 Delhi

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 deducted but not paid before the due date for filing the return. The amounts involved in this relating to disallowances under the Act were already disallowed in the total income statement and though this aspect was also raised before the CIT (Appeals), he failed to consider this aspect also while disposing of the first appeal.” 3. At the time

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

TDS-Income tax 24000.00 J.M.H.E.S. 477483.17 Dharmasthapanam H.E.A.M.S. 239932.00 Dharmasthapanam Investments: Federal Bank Share 5000.00 Dhanalakshmi Bank Share 127500.00 Loss in Kanmani A/c. Op. Balance 3077206.01 Add: For the year 755934.52 3833140.53 30130944.19 30130944.19 I.T.A. Nos.605/Coch/2005 & others The particulars of the cash at Bank show that the assessee was having a total amount of Rs.2

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

KERALA SHIPPING AND INLAND NAVIGATION CORPORATION LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Kerala Shipping & Inalnd Dcit, Corporate Circle - 1(1) Navigtation Corporation C.R. Building, I.S. Pres Road 38/924-A, Udaya Nagar Road Kochi 682018 Vs. Gandhi Nagar Kochi 682020 [Pan: Aabck4818L] (Appellant) (Respondent)

loss though in the computation correctly taxed the entire amount under section 115BBE Act of the Act. Thus, the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Hence the learned PCIT by exercising power conferred under section 263 of the Act set aside the assessment order for fresh assessment with the following direction: “Hence, the Assessment

M/S.MAGNUM BUILDTECH,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

loss and hardship to the appellant. B) The Appellate Commissioner ought to have found that going by the provisions of the 2nd proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) the appellant is entitled to deduction of the payments made to M/s. Born Builders Pvt. Ltd. as the said sub-contractor (Born Builders) have duly filed returns by including the payments made