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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

4. The basic purpose of appeals is to provide justice to assesses. By not condoning the delay on valid grounds, the CIT(A) has acted against the legislative intent behind appellate proceedings, that too in a case where assessments have been made ex parte. 5. The appeals were dismissed in haste by the CIT(A) ignoring the appellant’s request

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

5 of 16 beyond the control of the assessee, he prayed for the delay to be condoned. 2.2 The Ld.DR though objected however could not controvert the reasoning given by the Ld.AR for the delay that was caused in filing the present appeal. We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANAGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

5 SCC 459, this Court rejected the application for condonation of delay of 4 years in filing an application to set aside an exparte decree on the ground that the explanation offered for condonation of delay is found to be not satisfied. 30. In Postmaster General and others v. Living Media India Limited, (2012) 3 SCC 563, this Court, while

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

5 SCC 459, this Court rejected the application for condonation of delay of 4 years in filing an application to set aside an exparte decree on the ground that the explanation offered for condonation of delay is found to be not satisfied. 30. In Postmaster General and others v. Living Media India Limited, (2012) 3 SCC 563, this Court, while

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO ,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

5 SCC 459, this Court rejected the application for condonation of delay of 4 years in filing an application to set aside an exparte decree on the ground that the explanation offered for condonation of delay is found to be not satisfied. 30. In Postmaster General and others v. Living Media India Limited, (2012) 3 SCC 563, this Court, while

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

5 SCC 459, this Court rejected the application for condonation of delay of 4 years in filing an application to set aside an exparte decree on the ground that the explanation offered for condonation of delay is found to be not satisfied. 30. In Postmaster General and others v. Living Media India Limited, (2012) 3 SCC 563, this Court, while

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

M/S CHIRAYINKEEZHU SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,CHIRAYINKEEZHU vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

4) of Section 80P of the Act. The appellant is a co-operative credit society under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act whose primary object is to provide financial accommodation to its members who are all other co-operative societies and not members of the public. 15.14. Therefore, when the definition of “co-operative bank” in Section