SRI VARGHESE M.UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI VARGHESE M.UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 249(2)(b) within 30 days of the notice of demand relating to the assessment or penalty. It was found that in the aforesaid cases the notices of demand were duly served on the assessee as per the prescribed procedure and the records indicated that the assessee was in knowledge of the same. 3.4 In view of the above

M/S KADIRUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Kadirur Service Co- Operative Bank Ltd., The Income Tax Kadirur, Officer, Thalassery, Ward – 2, Kannur, Kannur. Kerala – 670 642. Vs. Pan: Aaffk6859E Appellant Respondent : Shri Arun Raj .S, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ilayaraja K.S, Sr. Dr

15-07-2024 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal arises out of order passed by NFAC, Delhi dated 22.11.2022 for A.Y. 2009-10. 2. At the outset, it is submitted that, there is delay of 12 days in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal. The Ld.AR furnished affidavit for condonation of delay that reads as under: Page

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 6. The assesse is a credit co-operative society registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act 1969. For the AY 2012-13 the assesse filed its return of income on 9.11.2019. As per the return the taxable income was Nil after claiming deduction

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 6. The assesse is a credit co-operative society registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act 1969. For the AY 2012-13 the assesse filed its return of income on 9.11.2019. As per the return the taxable income was Nil after claiming deduction

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 6. The assesse is a credit co-operative society registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act 1969. For the AY 2012-13 the assesse filed its return of income on 9.11.2019. As per the return the taxable income was Nil after claiming deduction

AVINISSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1),THRISSUR, THRISSUR

condone the delay in filing the present appeal and proceeded to adjudicated the following grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee: - *"1. This is an Appeal by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) by the Ld. AO on 21/12/2018 and disallowed the deduction u/s 80 P. The appellant Avinissery Service Co-operative Bank Limited

EDAVILANGU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO 3468,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), THRISSUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

15 ITA Nos. 405 & 406/Coch/2024 of Section 80P of the Act. Hence, assessment order is liable to be interfered and setaside in the interest of justice. So, the impugned orders issued by the assessing authority as well as the appellate authority may be interfered and the said orders may be setaside in the interest of justice.” 2. Both the appeals

EDAVILANGU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO 3468,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), THRISSUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

15 ITA Nos. 405 & 406/Coch/2024 of Section 80P of the Act. Hence, assessment order is liable to be interfered and setaside in the interest of justice. So, the impugned orders issued by the assessing authority as well as the appellate authority may be interfered and the said orders may be setaside in the interest of justice.” 2. Both the appeals