SREE ANJANEYA MEDICAL TRUST,KOZHIKODE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2 (1), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust Acit, Circle - 2 17/501X-1, Kanchas Building Aayakar Bhavan Opp. Indoor Stadium Mananachira Vs. Rajaji Road, New Bus Stand Kozhikode 673001 Kozhikode 673004 [Pan: Aahts3844B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

condonation petition for delay in filing the application for registration u/s 12A [for the AYs under dispute] has not yet been decided by the CBDT and, therefore, the total incomes of the assessee were to be assessed as per commercial principles. The CIT (A) was also not justified in taking a similar stand that of the AO, without taking cognizance

PAVANA MANUEL XAVIER,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD 2(3), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed for statistical purposes

condone the delay and admit the\nappeal for adjudication.\n6. At the outset, I find that the NFAC issued notices through\nITBA portal, with remained uncomplied with. In my considered\nopinion, it is not a valid method and manner of service of notice as\nspecified under the provisions of section 282(1) of the Income-tax\nAct

CHRIST THE KING CHURCH,KOCHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : Na

12A (1)of the Act by doing so the CIT (E) has gone against the decision of the honorable Gujarath High Court in The Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Ahmedabad Vs Jamiatul Banaat Tankaria where the Court relied on the decision of the Honorable Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Dawoodi Bohara Jamat reported

INFANT JESUS CHURCH,KOCHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : Na

12A (1)of the Act by doing so the CIT (E) has gone against the decision of the honorable Gujarath High Court in The Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Ahmedabad Vs Jamiatul Banaat Tankaria where the Court relied on the decision of the Honorable Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Dawoodi Bohara Jamat reported

NADATHARA GRAMA VIKASANA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed and the stay applications are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In the facts of the present case, ordinarily, the matter would have been remitted to the file of NFAC, however from the perusal of the impugned order, it would reveal that no proper service of notice

NADATHARA GRAMA VIKASANA SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), , THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed and the stay applications are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In the facts of the present case, ordinarily, the matter would have been remitted to the file of NFAC, however from the perusal of the impugned order, it would reveal that no proper service of notice

MONZEY VARGHESE,PALLIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX COMMISIONER, MATTANCHERY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the notices of hearing issued by the CIT(A) were not served on the appellant as the email ID provided in Form 35 belongs to the staff of the Chartered Accountant’s office who submitted the appeal. Since the staff left employment

MONZEY VARGHESE,PALLIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MATTANCHERY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the notices of hearing issued by the CIT(A) were not served on the appellant as the email ID provided in Form 35 belongs to the staff of the Chartered Accountant’s office who submitted the appeal. Since the staff left employment

MONZEY VARGHESE,PALLIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MATTANCHERY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the notices of hearing issued by the CIT(A) were not served on the appellant as the email ID provided in Form 35 belongs to the staff of the Chartered Accountant’s office who submitted the appeal. Since the staff left employment

BENEESH KUMAR,KOCHI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 1(1), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Beneesh Kumar .......... Appellant Madathuparambu House, Thattzham Road Vaduthala, Kochi 682023 [Pan: Agipb7548Q] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Non-Corporate Ward, Kochi Appellant By: Shri Ramesh Cherian, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Omanakutan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2025

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. At the outset we found that the learned CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without entering into the merits of the addition. We found from para 1 of the order

SAVE A FAMILY PLAN (INDIA),,KANJOOR vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Save A Family Plan (India) Dy. Cit, Exemption Aiswaryagram, Parappuram San Juan Towers, 2Nd Floor Vs. Kanjoor - 683575 Old Railway Station Road [Pan:Aabts9439E] Kochi 682018 (Appellant) (Respondent)

delay in filing appeal stands condoned by the order passed by Third Member. We now proceed to dwell into the merits of the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the appellant is a charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act and also enjoying registration under FCRA. The appellant trust

MUDIYILATHU RADHAKRISHNAKURUP RESMIKALA,CHENGANNOOR vs. ITO, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. At the outset, we find that the NFAC had issued notices of hearing through ITBA Portal. In our considered opinion, it is not the provisions

MUDIYILATHU RADHAKRISHNAKURUP RESMIKALA,CHENGANNOOR vs. ITO, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. At the outset, we find that the NFAC had issued notices of hearing through ITBA Portal. In our considered opinion, it is not the provisions

MUDIYILATHU RADHAKRISHNAKURUP RESMIKALA,CHENGANNOOR vs. ITO, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. At the outset, we find that the NFAC had issued notices of hearing through ITBA Portal. In our considered opinion, it is not the provisions

MUDIYILATHU RADHAKRISHNAKURUP RESMIKALA,CHENGANNOOR vs. ITO, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. At the outset, we find that the NFAC had issued notices of hearing through ITBA Portal. In our considered opinion, it is not the provisions

COCHIN SHIPYARD EMPLOYEES MUTHUAL AND PUBLIC WELFARE TRUST,PERUMANUR vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

section 12A of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeals. 6. The learned A.R. submits that the application moved by the appellant trust for condonation of delay in filing the prescribed audit report is pending before the Pr. CIT (Exemption), Kochi. Therefore, the matter may be kept in abeyance

COCHIN SHIPYARD EMPLOYEES MUTUAL AND PUBLIC WELFARE TRUST,COCHIN vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

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

section 12A of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeals. 6. The learned A.R. submits that the application moved by the appellant trust for condonation of delay in filing the prescribed audit report is pending before the Pr. CIT (Exemption), Kochi. Therefore, the matter may be kept in abeyance

KERALA BEEDI AND CIGAR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,KANNUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD , KANNUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: BEFORESHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

1,58,03,104/- instead of Rs.4,61,27,469/-. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but the assessee fails to succeed. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee filed Form 10B with delay which was condoned

KERALA BEEDI AND CIGAR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,KANNUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: BEFORESHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

1,58,03,104/- instead of Rs.4,61,27,469/-. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but the assessee fails to succeed. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee filed Form 10B with delay which was condoned