THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), THRISSUR vs. SRI.K.P. JOHNY, THRISSUR

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dask.P. Johny Asst. Cit, Manappuram House Circle – 2(1) Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Thrissur 680307 Sakthan Thampuran Nagar [Pan:Acgpj4958G] Thrissur 680001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit, K.P. Johny Circle – 2(1) Manappuram House Aayakar Bhavan Hospital Road, Chalakkudy Vs. Sakthan Thampuran Nagar Thrissur 680307 Thrissur 680001 [Pan: Acgpj4958G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

5) Cheque # 594884 Dt 17/02/2014 = Rs.50,00,000/- 6) SBINH14049330795 = Rs. 3,03,86,682 Dt. 18/02/2014 7) SBINH14049328558 = Rs. 31,69,629 Dt. 18/02/2014 8) SBINH14049328538 = Rs. 14,43,689 Dt. 18/02/2014 Total: Rs 6,75,00,000/-” (emphasis, supplied) The primary facts are undisputed, and for which, apart from the sale agreement, we may refer to the Manko

MR.P.C.JOSE,,COCHIN vs. DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasp.C. Jose Deputy Commissioner Of Prop. Brothers Agencies Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Jews Street Vs. Kochi Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of P.C. Jose Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Prop. Brothers Agencies Kochi Vs. Jews Street Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 29.12.2010 for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. ITA Nos. 54& 84/Coch/2012 (AY: 2008-09) P.C. Jose v. Dy CIT / Dy. CIT v. P.C. Jose Ex-parte Order 2. The appeals were heard at length on 10.08.2023, covering all the issues, including the principal one, being the assessment

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

43(1) of the Act. This issue had arisen in earlier year in AY 2010-11 in assessee’s own case. The Tribunal vide order dated 10.01.2018 in ITA No. 223/Coch/2015 had held it to be revenue expenditure. On further appeal by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Kerala High Court, the Hon'ble High Court

DCIT, COCHIN vs. SHRI M GEORGE ( MUKKADAYIL JOSEPH GEORGE), COCHIN

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasdy. Cit, Circle 2(1), Range – 2 M.J. George C.R. Building, I.S. Press Road, Mukkadayil House Kochi 682018 Vs. Krishnaswamy Cross Road Ernakulam, Kochi - 682035 [Pan: Adgpg6991D] (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Sri Sajit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Assessee By: Sri R. Lokanathan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2023 Order Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Agitating The Allowance Of The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 31.12.2008 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2006-07, By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kochi [Cit(A)] Vide His Order Dated 31.03.2011. 2. The Facts Of The Case In Brief Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Who Had Returned His Income For The Year At Rs.63,420/- (From Business & Other Sources), Was Found To Have A Credit Of Rs.899.10 Lakhs In His Bank Account On 14.02.2006. The Same Was Explained In The Assessment Proceedings As Sale Proceeds Of 5.21 Acres Of Land At Kakkanad Village, Falling Under Thrikkakara Panchayat, Sold For Rs.977.10 Lakhs Vide Registered Sale Deed Dated 13.02.2006. The Sale Was In Pursuance Of An Agreement To Sell Dated 09.01.2006, Receiving Rs.78 Lakhs As Advance. The Said Land

section 2(14)(iii) of the Act, which reads as under, no income by way of capital gain arose on it’s transfer, and which explained in the non-returning thereof: “2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (1) to (13)....... (14) "capital asset" means— (a) property of any kind held by an assessee, whether or not connected

GOOD HOMES PVT LTD,KOCHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) dated 18.3.2015 and 29.3.2014 for assessment year (AY) 2007-2008, respectively. The background facts of both the cases being same, these are heard together, and are being disposed of pera common, consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA Nos.870& 884 /Coch/2022 (AY 2007-08) Ajit

AJIT ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. JCIT, CORPORATE RANGE - 1, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) dated 18.3.2015 and 29.3.2014 for assessment year (AY) 2007-2008, respectively. The background facts of both the cases being same, these are heard together, and are being disposed of pera common, consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA Nos.870& 884 /Coch/2022 (AY 2007-08) Ajit

JULIUS RUBEN,KOCHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

gains from business or profession computed in accordance with the provisions of sections 28 to 43D of the Act and in the instances stated by the Assessing Officer for an aggregate amount of Rs. 6,55,650 the appellant did not claim any deduction and therefore provisions of section 40A(3) are not applicable. 7. The Hon. Commissioner of Income

SRI.JOHN MATHEW N,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO, WD-2, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri John Mathew N. The Income Tax Officer Neroth House Ward - 2, Alleppey Vs. No. 1, Jubilee Road Alappuzha [Pan: Acupm8885D] Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Anil D. Nair & Shri P.K. Biju, Advocates Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Appeal By The Assessee Challenges The Validity Of The Reassessment Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 20.11.2007 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2001-02, Since Upheld In First Appeal Vide Order Dated 24.01.2018 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kottayam (‘Cit(A)’ For Short). 2.1 At The Outset, Shri Anil D. Nair, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee-Appellant, Would Submit That The Basis Of The Assessee’S Challenge Is Two-Fold: (A) Non-Supply Of The Reasons Recorded; & (B) True & Full Disclosure Of All Material Facts Relating To The Income Escaping Assessment By The Assessee Per His Return Of Income.

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 20.11.2007 for assessment year (AY) 2001-02, since upheld in first appeal vide Order dated 24.01.2018 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kottayam (‘CIT(A)’ for short). 2.1 At the outset, Shri Anil D. Nair, the ld. counsel for the assessee-appellant, would submit that

GEORGE STANLEY,THIRUVALLA vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE, TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 28.12.2016 for assessment year (AY) 2014-2015, by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-12, Bengaluru [CIT(A)], vide his order dated 20.12.2021. 2. The appeal, filed on 11.05.2022, after accounting for the blanket saving on account of Covid by the Hon’ble Apex Court

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

ABC BUILDWARES(P) LIMITED,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1`, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

ABC BUILDWARES INDIA(P) LIMITED,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

RUCHIT PARIMAL ASHAR,SANALA ROAD, MORBI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

43 Abdul Gafoor -do- 2020-21 518/COCH/2024 44 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2017-18 519/COCH/2024 45 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2018-19 520/COCH/2024 46 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2019-20 521/COCH/2024 47 Muhammed Jabir -do- 2020-21 522/COCH/2024 48 Muhammed Madani -do- 2013-14 523/COCH/2024 49 Muhammed Madani ACIT, Central 2017-18 Circle, Calicut 524/COCH/2024 50 Muhammed Madani -do- 2018-19 528/COCH/2024