M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

capital borrowed for the purpose of business or profession, therefore, proposal to apply provisions of section 37(1), which is obviously a general provision for all expense, is unreasonable and unsustainable in law. 5. Attention is invited to the original assessment order passed by the AO, wherein he made necessary enquiries and verifications while framing the same. Hence order under

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

Gains of Profession or Business? 4.3. What would be the income assessable if the transactions carried, with funds borrowed from public, are treated as illegal business? 4.3.1. From the facts as discussed above at para 4.1, it is evident that the assessing officer classified the fund borrowed by the assessee from public as illegal in nature since

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

Gains of Profession or Business? 4.3. What would be the income assessable if the transactions carried, with funds borrowed from public, are treated as illegal business? 4.3.1. From the facts as discussed above at para 4.1, it is evident that the assessing officer classified the fund borrowed by the assessee from public as illegal in nature since

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

Gains of Profession or Business? 4.3. What would be the income assessable if the transactions carried, with funds borrowed from public, are treated as illegal business? 4.3.1. From the facts as discussed above at para 4.1, it is evident that the assessing officer classified the fund borrowed by the assessee from public as illegal in nature since

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS,, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

Gains of Profession or Business? 4.3. What would be the income assessable if the transactions carried, with funds borrowed from public, are treated as illegal business? 4.3.1. From the facts as discussed above at para 4.1, it is evident that the assessing officer classified the fund borrowed by the assessee from public as illegal in nature since

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

Gains of Profession or Business? 4.3. What would be the income assessable if the transactions carried, with funds borrowed from public, are treated as illegal business? 4.3.1. From the facts as discussed above at para 4.1, it is evident that the assessing officer classified the fund borrowed by the assessee from public as illegal in nature since

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

Gains of Profession or Business? 4.3. What would be the income assessable if the transactions carried, with funds borrowed from public, are treated as illegal business? 4.3.1. From the facts as discussed above at para 4.1, it is evident that the assessing officer classified the fund borrowed by the assessee from public as illegal in nature since

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

Gains of Profession or Business? 4.3. What would be the income assessable if the transactions carried, with funds borrowed from public, are treated as illegal business? 4.3.1. From the facts as discussed above at para 4.1, it is evident that the assessing officer classified the fund borrowed by the assessee from public as illegal in nature since

DCIT, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S ACEELERATED FREEZE DRYING CO, LTD, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the appeal of the

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

section 43B I.T.A. Nos. 714/Coch/2008 & 1286/Coch/2005 of the Act. Hence, we are in full agreement with the finding of the CIT(A) and the same is confirmed. Thus, this ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 9. The next ground is relating to disallowance of part of interest claimed. The AO in para 4 of the assessment order

ACEELERATED FREEZE DRYING CO.LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. DCIT, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the appeal of the

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

section 43B I.T.A. Nos. 714/Coch/2008 & 1286/Coch/2005 of the Act. Hence, we are in full agreement with the finding of the CIT(A) and the same is confirmed. Thus, this ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 9. The next ground is relating to disallowance of part of interest claimed. The AO in para 4 of the assessment order

ROSE GEORGE KOLLANUR,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2014-15

capital gain account scheme in a case where the amount is utilised fully towards purchase/construction of the new asset within the time limit as specified in section 54F. In this regard, the ld. AR relied on the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. K. Ramachandra Rao, ITA No.74/2014. 4. The ld. DR relied

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.PVR TOURIST HOME, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Non-Corporate .......... Appellant Iind Floor, C.R. Building, I.S. Press Road Ernakulam 682018 Vs. Pvr Tourist Home .......... Respondent Palarivattom, Kochi 682025 [Pan: Aadfp3442Q] Appellant By: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, Cit-Dr Respondent By: Shri Mohan Pulickal, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.03.2025

1) of the Act not attracting any capital gains tax because the transfer was at the book value. The Commissioner acting under section 263 held that the entire transaction attracted tax on capital gains u/s. 45(4) of the Act. The assessee's appeal on the levy of capital gains tax on land value was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

1),theargument before the Supreme Court was arising out of the return of income of the assessee. The amountreceived by the asessee on surrender of tenancy right, whether liable to capital gains under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was involved in that appeal before the Supreme Court. There was a lease agreement entered into in the year

THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

1),theargument before the Supreme Court was arising out of the return of income of the assessee. The amountreceived by the asessee on surrender of tenancy right, whether liable to capital gains under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was involved in that appeal before the Supreme Court. There was a lease agreement entered into in the year

THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.GRACY BABU, ADOOR P.O.

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

1),theargument before the Supreme Court was arising out of the return of income of the assessee. The amountreceived by the asessee on surrender of tenancy right, whether liable to capital gains under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was involved in that appeal before the Supreme Court. There was a lease agreement entered into in the year

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

1),theargument before the Supreme Court was arising out of the return of income of the assessee. The amountreceived by the asessee on surrender of tenancy right, whether liable to capital gains under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was involved in that appeal before the Supreme Court. There was a lease agreement entered into in the year

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

1),theargument before the Supreme Court was arising out of the return of income of the assessee. The amountreceived by the asessee on surrender of tenancy right, whether liable to capital gains under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was involved in that appeal before the Supreme Court. There was a lease agreement entered into in the year

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

1),theargument before the Supreme Court was arising out of the return of income of the assessee. The amountreceived by the asessee on surrender of tenancy right, whether liable to capital gains under section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was involved in that appeal before the Supreme Court. There was a lease agreement entered into in the year