INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY P.O vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered under the provisions of the Act and run various educational institutions. During the assessment year 2012- 2013, the assessment was made without any additions to the income returned by the assessee. On going through the documents

INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY, KOTHAMANGALAM vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered under the provisions of the Act and run various educational institutions. During the assessment year 2012- 2013, the assessment was made without any additions to the income returned by the assessee. On going through the documents

THE KALPETTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KALPETTA vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, KALPETTA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

delayed by 23 days, which stands since condoned by the Tribunal vide it’s interim order dated 27.02.2023. 3. It was, at the outset, a common ground before us that the instant appeals are squarely covered by the order by the Tribunal in The Karannur SCB Ltd. v. ITO (in ITA Nos.248 & 249/Coch/2020, dated 16.11.2023), copy on which is placed

THE KALPETTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KALPETTA vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, KALPETTA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

delayed by 23 days, which stands since condoned by the Tribunal vide it’s interim order dated 27.02.2023. 3. It was, at the outset, a common ground before us that the instant appeals are squarely covered by the order by the Tribunal in The Karannur SCB Ltd. v. ITO (in ITA Nos.248 & 249/Coch/2020, dated 16.11.2023), copy on which is placed

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

273B of the Act. 9. Lastly comes the Revenue’s case in AY 2017-18 that we ought to confirm the impugned section 270A penalty as it pertains to unexplained cash deposit made during the demonetisation period. Learned DR’s case is that assessee’s cash deposits in fact represent his under reported income u/s. 270A