M/S.COMBINED FOODS P. LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Combined Foods Private The Principal Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax, Kochi-1. 28/3030, Elamkulam, Cheruparambath Road, Kadavanthara, Kochi-682 020. [Pan:Aaacc 9366N] Assessee-Appellant Revenue-Respondent

142(1) of the Act could not have been formulated. I.T.A. No.155 /Coch/2017 87. The Assessing Officer was required to examine the return filed by the assessee in order to ascertain his income and to levy appropriate tax on that basis. When the Assessing Officer was satisfied that the return filed by the assessee was in accordance with

REJI KRISHNAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K

142(1) were issued, for which the assessee filed detailed written submissions along with documents. The Assessing Officer (AO) after considering 2 Sri.Reji Krishnan. the reply and the documents had disallowed the claim made u/s 54F of the Act in respect of the investment made in the second residential house along with other expenditure involved in respect of the purchase

M/S.BABY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1), KOZHIKKODE

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

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

142(1) of the Act which is enclosed with the first questionnaire would proceed to verify only the specific aspects requiring examination/verification. In such cases, all efforts would be made to ensure that assessment proceedings are completed expeditiously in minimum possible number of hearings without unnecessarily dragging the case till the time-barring date. 4. In case, during the course

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged

THE KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LIMITED,KOLLAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd. .......... Appellant Sankaramangalam, Chavara, Kollam 691583 [Pan: Aaact8118R] Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax .......... Respondent Circle - 1, Kollam Appellant By: Shri Rajeev R., Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 13.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.05.2025

capital expenditure, Section 31 cannot be invoked. Similarly, Section 37(1) cannot also be invoked. 31. On the contention of Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Standing Counsel that the assessee originally capitalised the expenditure, but reversed the same later, we have to point out that there cannot be any estoppel in such cases. The question whether a particular expenditure would fall within

THE ITO, COCHIN vs. SRI.AMBADY KRISHNA MENON, COCHIN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection filed

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

Capital Gains has already been disclosed in the original Return of Income field u/s 139(1) by the Assessee on 30/07/2011 for which disclosure was correct - including the transaction itself and the gross amount received on such sale; except for a mistake in the income calculated on the sale of equity shares of the company and there was no concealment

M/S KODIYATHUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK,CALICUT vs. THE ITO, CALICUT

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 414/Coch/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011. Vs. M/S. Kodiyathur Service Co- The Income Tax Officer, Operative Bank Ltd, Ward 2(3) Pannikode, P.O. Kozhikode. Kozhikode. [Pan Aaaak 5312L] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

142(1) of the Act. Claim of the assessee that it was only a primary agricultural credit society and income earned by it from providing credit facilities to its members was exempt under section 80P(2) (a)(i) of the Act was declined by the ld. Assessing Officer, relying on sub section

RAMLA HAMEED,ALAPPUZHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with the direction that the Assessing

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

capital gain to tax notice under section 143 (2) and 142 (1) of the act where issued, which were partially

M/S KARASSERY SERVICE CO-OP BANK,CALICUT vs. THE ITO, CALICUT

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.417/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011. M/S. Karassery Service Co- The Income Tax Officer, Operative Bank, Vs. Ward 2(3) Karassery P.O. Kozhikode. Kozhikode.

142(1) of the Act. Claim of the assessee that it was only a primary agricultural credit society and income earned by it from providing credit facilities to its members was exempt under section 80P(2) (a)(i) of the Act was declined by the ld. Assessing Officer, relying on sub section

THOMAS VARGHESE,TRIVANDRUM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2010-11 Thomas Varghese .......... Appellant Manthottathu Bunglow, Hose No. 38 Lane 1, Peroorada, Trivandrum 695005 [Pan: Altpv0273E] Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax .......... Respondent International Taxation Thiruvananthapuram Appellant By: ------- None ------- Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.02.2025

capital gain. Therefore, notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued to the assessee, which were not complied

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI, PARTNER (ABC SALES CORPORATION),TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

142 (1) for the relevant year or even during the assessment proceedings or even after the completion of the same , the whole proceedings initiat6ed and completed under section 153C stand vitiated and hence assessment framed in the hands of the appellant is not valid. Reliance is placed on the decision : CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI PARTNER, ABC SALES CORPORATION,TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

142 (1) for the relevant year or even during the assessment proceedings or even after the completion of the same , the whole proceedings initiat6ed and completed under section 153C stand vitiated and hence assessment framed in the hands of the appellant is not valid. Reliance is placed on the decision : CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears

KODIYIL MUHAMMED MADANI, PARTNER(ABC SALAES CORPORATION),TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

142 (1) for the relevant year or even during the assessment proceedings or even after the completion of the same , the whole proceedings initiat6ed and completed under section 153C stand vitiated and hence assessment framed in the hands of the appellant is not valid. Reliance is placed on the decision : CIT Vs. Calcutta Knitwears