M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years (AYs.) 2005-06, 2007-08 to 2009-190, of even date, i.e., 31/7/2014, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Kochi (CITA), vide a common order dated 20.06.2022. 2. The appeals are delayed

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years (AYs.) 2005-06, 2007-08 to 2009-190, of even date, i.e., 31/7/2014, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Kochi (CITA), vide a common order dated 20.06.2022. 2. The appeals are delayed

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years (AYs.) 2005-06, 2007-08 to 2009-190, of even date, i.e., 31/7/2014, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Kochi (CITA), vide a common order dated 20.06.2022. 2. The appeals are delayed

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years (AYs.) 2005-06, 2007-08 to 2009-190, of even date, i.e., 31/7/2014, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Kochi (CITA), vide a common order dated 20.06.2022. 2. The appeals are delayed

M/S SANTHIMADOM HERBAL CITY TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

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

section 153C r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (`the Act’ hereinafter) for the said years vide separate orders dated 31.07.2014. 2. At the outset, it was observed by the Bench that the appeals, filed on 10.10.2022, are with a delay of 27 days. An affidavit of even date by Dr. V.N. Radhakrishnan, Managing Trustee, explains the reasons leading

M/S SANTHIMADOM HERBAL CITY TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

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

section 153C r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (`the Act’ hereinafter) for the said years vide separate orders dated 31.07.2014. 2. At the outset, it was observed by the Bench that the appeals, filed on 10.10.2022, are with a delay of 27 days. An affidavit of even date by Dr. V.N. Radhakrishnan, Managing Trustee, explains the reasons leading

THE CHORODE SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD LL139,CHORODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

144 of the Act). Assessee, against the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, has filed a rectification application under section 154 of the Act (vide application dated 16.06.2020) and the same is pending disposal. The CIT(A) in the impugned order has directed the AO to dispose off the said rectification application dated 16.06.2020. Moreover, if assessee

THE CHORODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, LL139,CHORODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

144 of the Act). Assessee, against the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, has filed a rectification application under section 154 of the Act (vide application dated 16.06.2020) and the same is pending disposal. The CIT(A) in the impugned order has directed the AO to dispose off the said rectification application dated 16.06.2020. Moreover, if assessee

PANTHEERANKAVE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO,WARD -2(3), KOZHIKODE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pantheerankav Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Olavanna, Kozhikode 673019 [Pan: Aaaap6394F] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Arun Raj S., Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 12.12.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Appellant Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969. It Is Classified As A Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society. The Appellant Had Not Filed Return Of Income Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) For Ay 2017-18. Based On The Information That The Appellant Made

section 144 at a total income of Rs. 2,54,78,140/-. While doing so, the AO had denied deduction u/s. 80P of the Act and made several disallowances. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case

SRI.V.I. GEORGE KUTTY,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO,, KOLLAM

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George Mathan, Jm

Sections 234A and 234B. These assessment orders have acquired finality since no appeal has been filed. 4. The appeals filed by the assessee are belated. The petition for Condonation of delay is also submitted. The reasons for the delay are also stated in the affidavit submitted along with the petition for Condonation of delay. The assessee discontinued the business soon

SRI.V.I. GEORGE KUTTY,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO,, KOLLAM

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George Mathan, Jm

Sections 234A and 234B. These assessment orders have acquired finality since no appeal has been filed. 4. The appeals filed by the assessee are belated. The petition for Condonation of delay is also submitted. The reasons for the delay are also stated in the affidavit submitted along with the petition for Condonation of delay. The assessee discontinued the business soon

CHRISTUDANAM YASSAYA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2011-12 Christudanam Yassaya .......... Appellant Bathel Kp 17A Maruthoor, Vattapara P.O. Thiruvananthapuram 695028 [Pan: Acmpy4412C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1) .......... Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar Thiruvananthapuram 695003

144 r.w.s. 264 on 29.11.2019 at a total income of Rs. 38,32,110/-. 3. The appellant, in response to the show cause notice u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, could not file original return of income as he was under treatment for psychological issues. However, the AO rejected the above explanation and proceeded with levy of penalty

THRISSUR DISTRICT NRI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as premature

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, based on information of high-value cash deposits, without granting the benefit of any deductions under Chapter VI-A, including section 80P(2)(a)(i). It is brought to our notice that the assessee has now filed a return of income and simultaneously filed an application before the CBDT under section

THE KATTOOR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

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

delay, in the absence of any\nevidence contrary, we are of the considered opinion that the\nappellant society is prevented by sufficient reasonable cause in filing\nthe appeal within the prescribed limit. Accordingly, we condone the\ndelay and admit the appeal for adjudication.\n8.\nThe learned counsel for the assessee contended that the\naddition made

LAILA AGENCIES,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ITO, WARD 2, , THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed on the ground of delay and latches

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Laila Agencies .......... Appellant Paliakara, Thiruvalla 689101 [Pan: Aaefl0921D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2 .......... Respondent T.K. Road, Thiruvalla 689101 Appellant By: Ms. Krishna K., Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2025

section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed by the appellant. The AO formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, notice u/s. 148 of the 2 Laila Agencies Act was issued on 29.03.2021. The appellant neither complied with the notices u/s. 148 nor notice u/s. 142(1)(ii) of the Act, which

SACRED HEART PUBLIC SCHOOL KOTTAYAM,KOTTAYAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeal and the stay application filed by the assessee stand dismissed

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

section 139(1) of the Act. The ITO (Exemption), Kottayam (hereinafter called "the AO"), based on the information that the appellant trust made cash deposits during demonetisation period formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, called upon the assessee to prepare a true and collect return of income for AY 2017-18 by issuing notice

THE KATTOOR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed by the appellant for AY 2014-15. However, the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter called "the AO"), based on the information that the appellant made cash deposit formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, a notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued

THE KATTOOR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed by the appellant for AY 2014-15. However, the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter called "the AO"), based on the information that the appellant made cash deposit formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, a notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued