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

condoning the delay, admit the appeal for being decided on merits. 3. It was, at the outset, submitted by Shri Joseph, the learned counsel for the assessee, that only the grounds of appeal in relation to levy of interest u/ss. 234A and 234B of the Act are being pressed. And toward which he would take us through the appeal memo

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

condoning the delay, admit the appeal for being decided on merits. 3. It was, at the outset, submitted by Shri Joseph, the learned counsel for the assessee, that only the grounds of appeal in relation to levy of interest u/ss. 234A and 234B of the Act are being pressed. And toward which he would take us through the appeal memo

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

condoning the delay, admit the appeal for being decided on merits. 3. It was, at the outset, submitted by Shri Joseph, the learned counsel for the assessee, that only the grounds of appeal in relation to levy of interest u/ss. 234A and 234B of the Act are being pressed. And toward which he would take us through the appeal memo

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

condoning the delay, admit the appeal for being decided on merits. 3. It was, at the outset, submitted by Shri Joseph, the learned counsel for the assessee, that only the grounds of appeal in relation to levy of interest u/ss. 234A and 234B of the Act are being pressed. And toward which he would take us through the appeal memo

CELESTIAL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,AMBALAMUGAL vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), ERNALUAM

In the result, appeal is "Dismissed"

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhcelestial Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Dcit, Corporate Circle - 1(1) Aiswarya Towers Cr Building, Is Press Road Hoc Junction, Ambalamugal Vs. Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682302 [Pan: Aaccc6737F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Heard both parties. Case file perused. 2. It emerges at the outset that the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in refusing to condone the 3951 days delay in filing the appeal by holdings as under: - “7. DECISION: 7.1. At the outset, it is observed that there

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) . Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned lower authorities have disallowed the Kottayam SCB Ltd. assessee’s sec.80P deduction claim(s) herein thereby treating it as a cooperative bank than a cooperative society

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) . Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned lower authorities have disallowed the Kottayam SCB Ltd. assessee’s sec.80P deduction claim(s) herein thereby treating it as a cooperative bank than a cooperative society

VILAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 337,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as under : - Vilvattam Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 336/Coch/202 2009-10 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/20 02.02.2023 3 22-23/1049366906(1) 2 337/Coch/202 2013-14 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/20 28.11.2023 3 22-23/1047678573(1) Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly

VILAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 337,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as under : - Vilvattam Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. Sr. ITA No. AY DIN & Order No. Date No. 1 336/Coch/202 2009-10 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/20 02.02.2023 3 22-23/1049366906(1) 2 337/Coch/202 2013-14 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/20 28.11.2023 3 22-23/1047678573(1) Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

250 4. Aggrieved by the orders passed u/s 200A of the I.T.Act, for various quarters levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. All the appeals filed before the first appellate authority were 3 ITA Nos.200 to 203/Coch/2021. Sri.Sabir Ali. barred by limitation. The assessee had filed petitions for condonation of delay

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

250 4. Aggrieved by the orders passed u/s 200A of the I.T.Act, for various quarters levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. All the appeals filed before the first appellate authority were 3 ITA Nos.200 to 203/Coch/2021. Sri.Sabir Ali. barred by limitation. The assessee had filed petitions for condonation of delay

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

250 4. Aggrieved by the orders passed u/s 200A of the I.T.Act, for various quarters levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. All the appeals filed before the first appellate authority were 3 ITA Nos.200 to 203/Coch/2021. Sri.Sabir Ali. barred by limitation. The assessee had filed petitions for condonation of delay

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

250 4. Aggrieved by the orders passed u/s 200A of the I.T.Act, for various quarters levying fees u/s 234E of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. All the appeals filed before the first appellate authority were 3 ITA Nos.200 to 203/Coch/2021. Sri.Sabir Ali. barred by limitation. The assessee had filed petitions for condonation of delay

SHOBHA RAMAKRISHNANA NAIR,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, WARD 2, ALUVA

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17 Shobha Ramakrishnan Nair Karthika Sebipuram Ito Ernakulam Ward-2 Vs. Manjapra So Aluva Kerala 683581 Pan No :Awrpr5406L Appellant Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.04.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 22.12.2023 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059003947(1) For The Ay 2016- 17 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Shobha Ramakrishnan Nair, Manjapra, Kerala Page 2 of 12 Shobha Ramakrishnan Nair, Manjapra, Kerala Page 3 of 12 Shobha Ramakrishnan Nair, Manjapra, Kerala Page 4 of 12 3. There is a delay of 202 days in filing the appeal

M/S.THE NELLIAMPATHY TEA & PRODUCE CO.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

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

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

250(2) and 234D amounting to Rs.25,27,708/- and Rs.3,39,845/- is against the provisions of law and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The I Assessing Officer was unjustified in charging interest on the total demand under section 220(2) since the demand was partly adjusted against the refund due pertaining to previous

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

condonation of delay, admit the instant appeals. Hearing was accordingly proceeded with. ITA Nos.920-921/Coch/2022 (AYs. 2008-09 & 2009-10) Santhimadom Herbal City Trust v. Asst. CIT 3. The assessee is a private trust formed on 01.01.2007 (02/11/2004, as per the impugned order) with the object of construction of a herbal city, apartments/villas, etc. for the promotion of herbal treatment, herbal

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

condonation of delay, admit the instant appeals. Hearing was accordingly proceeded with. ITA Nos.920-921/Coch/2022 (AYs. 2008-09 & 2009-10) Santhimadom Herbal City Trust v. Asst. CIT 3. The assessee is a private trust formed on 01.01.2007 (02/11/2004, as per the impugned order) with the object of construction of a herbal city, apartments/villas, etc. for the promotion of herbal treatment, herbal

THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

250 of the Act on 01/05/2024 which was also dismissed by the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, thereafter the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 96 days ITA Nos.408 & 409/Coch/2024 Thrissur District Police Cooperative Society Ltd., Thrissur Page 8 of 19 in both these appeals & accordingly requested to condone the delay of 96 days