KOLLOORVILA SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Q214,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICEER, KOLLAM

Appeal is allowed and later appeal

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

44 AB of the Income Tax Act comes under the purview of reasonable cause and enunciated under Section 273(B) of the Income Tax Act. 4. Without considering the replay furnished by the assessee society the assessing authority passed order under Section 271(B) of the Income Tax Act 1961 imposing maximum penalty of Rs.150000/-on 02.03.2022. 3 ITA Nos.667

KOLLOORVILA SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Q214,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KOLLAM

Appeal is allowed and later appeal

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

44 AB of the Income Tax Act comes under the purview of reasonable cause and enunciated under Section 273(B) of the Income Tax Act. 4. Without considering the replay furnished by the assessee society the assessing authority passed order under Section 271(B) of the Income Tax Act 1961 imposing maximum penalty of Rs.150000/-on 02.03.2022. 3 ITA Nos.667

JANATHA TRADING CORPORATION,ALUVA vs. THE DCIT, ALUVA

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

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. Nos.303/Coch/2014 & 128/ Coch/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 & 2010-11 M/S. Janatha Trading Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Corporation, Market Road, Income-Tax, Circle-1, Aluva. Aluva. [Pan: Aabfj 8478K]

condone the delay and the appeal is taken up for adjudication. 3. The grounds raised are as follows: ”Janatha Trading Corporation, Aluva is a partnership firm files all income tax returns in time and also for the assessment year 2008-09. The firm maintains books of accounts in true and correct produced before the assessing authority with supportive evidences

M/S.JANATHA TRADING CORPORATION,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ALUVA

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

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. Nos.303/Coch/2014 & 128/ Coch/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 & 2010-11 M/S. Janatha Trading Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Corporation, Market Road, Income-Tax, Circle-1, Aluva. Aluva. [Pan: Aabfj 8478K]

condone the delay and the appeal is taken up for adjudication. 3. The grounds raised are as follows: ”Janatha Trading Corporation, Aluva is a partnership firm files all income tax returns in time and also for the assessment year 2008-09. The firm maintains books of accounts in true and correct produced before the assessing authority with supportive evidences

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT,TDS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

Section 10 of the IT Act. 5 AAAAL0822C LBS CENTRE 64,44,687 No proof submitted for non- 644,469/- FOR SCIENCE deduction of Tax at source. AND TECHNOLOG Y Total 15,16,688/- Accordingly demanded TDS of Rs. 15,16,688/- along with interest u/s. 201(1A) of the Act of Rs. 13,22,784/- vide order dated

PERINGANDOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVA BANK LTD,ATHANI, THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

In the result, we dismiss these I

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Peringandoor Service Cooperative Bank Ltd .......... Appellant 11/102A, Athani P O, Athani, Thrissur-680581. Pan: Aadap3407G Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward-2(1), Thrissur. Appellant By: Shri Ramdas M, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025

44,36,816/- earned from the Treasury Account and Rubber market. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. At the outset, there is a delay of 327 days. the appellant had filed a petition seeking condonation of delay by stating that the delay had occurred on account of pursuing of alternative remedy

M/S.POPULAR TRADERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

M/S.POPULAR TRADERS,PATHANMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

M/S.POPULAR TRADERS,PATHANMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

M/S.POPULAR PRINTERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO (TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

M/S.POPULAR DEALERS,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR TRADERS, PATHANMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR DEALERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced

THE ITO,(TDS), ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.POPULAR DEALERS, PATHANAMTHITTA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

condone the delay of 23 days in filing these appeals by the assessees and proceed to dispose off the same on merits. 4. We shall first adjudicate the Revenue’s appeal. Revenue’s appeals 5. The grounds raised in the Revenue’s appeals are identical except for variance in figures. Hence the grounds raised in ITA No.307/Coch/2018 are reproduced