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

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

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

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

DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY,TRIVANDRUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - TDS, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petitions are dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The orders of the CIT(A) arose out of the orders passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) levying late fees under Section 234E of the Act. The assessee has also filed stay petitions seeking stay of recovery of outstanding tax arrears. The relevant assessment years

DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY,TRIVANDRUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- TDS, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petitions are dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The orders of the CIT(A) arose out of the orders passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) levying late fees under Section 234E of the Act. The assessee has also filed stay petitions seeking stay of recovery of outstanding tax arrears. The relevant assessment years

DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY,TRIVANDRUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petitions are dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The orders of the CIT(A) arose out of the orders passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) levying late fees under Section 234E of the Act. The assessee has also filed stay petitions seeking stay of recovery of outstanding tax arrears. The relevant assessment years

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL ,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT , TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL ,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT , TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the processing of it’s tax returns, one each for the four quarters of fy 2014-15, u/s.200A of the Act, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), vide separate orders dated 21.9.2022. The appeals raising the same issue, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed

M/S THE KASARAGOD TODDY TAPPERS AND SHOP WORKERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,KASARGOD vs. ITO WARD -1, KASARGOD

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkey

section 80P(1) entitling the society for deduction is generated out of the collective disposal of the labour of the appellant societies. 15.The society does not dispute the correctness of the factual finding that toddy is collected from non-members also. Though this was attempted to be explained by the learned counsel by pointing out that there are persons

M/S THE KASARAGOD TODDY TAPPERS AND SHOP WORKERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,KASARGOD vs. ITO WARD 1, KASARGOD

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkey

section 80P(1) entitling the society for deduction is generated out of the collective disposal of the labour of the appellant societies. 15.The society does not dispute the correctness of the factual finding that toddy is collected from non-members also. Though this was attempted to be explained by the learned counsel by pointing out that there are persons

K.L ABDUL SATHAR,SOUTH BAZAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIOER OF INCOME TAX, KANNUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2009-10 K.L. Abdul Sathar South Bazar Kannur 670002 Vs. Dcit Kannur Pan No : Aaffk4769B Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri R. Krishnan, A.R. Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.04.2025 O R D E R Perkeshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 29.01.2024 Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1060194335(1) For The Ay 2009-10 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: K.L. Abdul Sathar, Kannur Page 2 of 7 3. There is a delay of 92 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has drawn our attention on the petition for condonation

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

condone the delay\nin filing the present appeal and proceeded to adjudicated the\nfollowing grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee:\n\"1.\n2.\n3.\nThis is an Appeal by the assessee against the assessment\norder passed u/s 143(3) by the Ld. AO on 21/12/2018 and\ndisallowed the deduction u/s 80 P. The appellant Avinissery\nService Co-operative Bank

KALLUMALA AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD NO HW 14,ALAPPUZHA vs. ITO, WARD 2, THIRUVALLA

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

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

6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 7. At the outset, there is a delay of 174 days in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal. The appellant has filed a petition seeking condonation of delay by stating that the delay had occurred on account of the ignorance of the Income Tax Appellate