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

gains of business or profession. Sub-section 1 of section 43 provides for fixing of actual cost of asset. Explanation 8 to section 43 was added by Finance Act, 1986 w.e.f. 1/4/1974. The object of the said amendment as contained in the Finance Bill, 1986 as it appears in 158 ITR (St.) 88 reads as under: “Under the existing provisions

SUJA MARIAMMA GEORGE ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE INTL.TXN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the stay applications are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

capital gains by adopting the value of the land as applicable for stamp duty purposes. In support of the contention, the assessee has also filed valuation report of the Registered Valuer. However, the DRP could not find any force in the arguments of the assessee and affirmed the draft order. Thereafter the AO passed the final assessment year. 5. Aggrieved

THOMAS GEORGE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE INTL.TXN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the stay applications are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

capital gains by adopting the value of the land as applicable for stamp duty purposes. In support of the contention, the assessee has also filed valuation report of the Registered Valuer. However, the DRP could not find any force in the arguments of the assessee and affirmed the draft order. Thereafter the AO passed the final assessment year. 5. Aggrieved

SRI.ALAVIKUTTY,VENGARA,MALAPPURAM vs. THE DCIT, CALICUT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

capital gains accrued to the assessee on the sale of property which was not disclosed by the assessee in the return of income filed in response to notice-u/s 153C. Therefore, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c). In reply to the notice issued u/s. 271(1)(c), the assessee submitted that he had disclosed

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

171 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by the Commissioner (Appeals) and after making such further

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

171 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by the Commissioner (Appeals) and after making such further

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

171 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by the Commissioner (Appeals) and after making such further

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

171 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by the Commissioner (Appeals) and after making such further

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

171 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by the Commissioner (Appeals) and after making such further

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

171 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by the Commissioner (Appeals) and after making such further

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ERNAKULAM

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

171) held that if assessee had its own surplus fund against which small investments were made, disallowance of interest and administrative expenses under Section 14A is not warranted. The Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue authorities before the Apex Court was also dismissed. The company has huge net-worth which is much times higher than the total investment made

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

171) held that if assessee had its own surplus fund against which small investments were made, disallowance of interest and administrative expenses under Section 14A is not warranted. The Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue authorities before the Apex Court was also dismissed. The company has huge net-worth which is much times higher than the total investment made

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

171) held that if assessee had its own surplus fund against which small investments were made, disallowance of interest and administrative expenses under Section 14A is not warranted. The Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue authorities before the Apex Court was also dismissed. The company has huge net-worth which is much times higher than the total investment made

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

171) held that if assessee had its own surplus fund against which small investments were made, disallowance of interest and administrative expenses under Section 14A is not warranted. The Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue authorities before the Apex Court was also dismissed. The company has huge net-worth which is much times higher than the total investment made

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

171) held that if assessee had its own surplus fund against which small investments were made, disallowance of interest and administrative expenses under Section 14A is not warranted. The Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue authorities before the Apex Court was also dismissed. The company has huge net-worth which is much times higher than the total investment made

THE ACIT, , KOCHI vs. M/S.FEDERAL BANK LTD, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

171 ITA Nos. 745 to 747/Coch/2019 ITA Nos. 33 to 35, 272 to 275, 309 to 311/Coch/2020 Page 16 of 28 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer

ACIT, KOCHI vs. FEDERAL BANK LTD, ALUVA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

171 ITA Nos. 745 to 747/Coch/2019 ITA Nos. 33 to 35, 272 to 275, 309 to 311/Coch/2020 Page 16 of 28 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.FEDERAL BANK LTD, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

171 ITA Nos. 745 to 747/Coch/2019 ITA Nos. 33 to 35, 272 to 275, 309 to 311/Coch/2020 Page 16 of 28 (Guj.) 12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and are of the view that before 01.06.2001, section 251(1)(a) provided that CIT(A) may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer