THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

depreciation allowance is, subject to the provisions of section 34, permissible only in respect of certain assets specified therein, namely, buildings, machinery, plant and furniture owned by the assessee and used for the purpose of business while section 43(3) defines 'plant' in very wide terms saying "plant includes ships, vehicles, books, scientific apparatus and surgical equipments used

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M.S COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

depreciation allowance is, subject to the provisions of section 34, permissible only in respect of certain assets specified therein, namely, buildings, machinery, plant and furniture owned by the assessee and used for the purpose of business while section 43(3) defines 'plant' in very wide terms saying "plant includes ships, vehicles, books, scientific apparatus and surgical equipments used

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

90,575/-However, in the Return of income filed for AY 2010-11, the opening balance under the same head as on 01.-04.2009 was shown as Rs.20,20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL.,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

90,575/-However, in the Return of income filed for AY 2010-11, the opening balance under the same head as on 01.-04.2009 was shown as Rs.20,20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

90,575/-However, in the Return of income filed for AY 2010-11, the opening balance under the same head as on 01.-04.2009 was shown as Rs.20,20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL ,KAKKANAD vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

90,575/-However, in the Return of income filed for AY 2010-11, the opening balance under the same head as on 01.-04.2009 was shown as Rs.20,20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section

PARISONS FOODS PRIVATE LTD,CALICUT vs. DCIT , CIRCLE 1(1), KOZHIKODE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.(Through Virtual Hearing) Parisons Foods Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 6/1183, Kunhipari Buildins Kozhikode Calicut 673032 Vs. Pan – Aaccp2898J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Surendranath Rao, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ilaiyaraja, K.S., Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2024 O R D E R Per: Soundararajan K., J.M. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Challenges The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Cit(A)) Dated 01.02.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) In Respect Of Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. The Assessee Is In The Business Of Refining & Sale Of Crude Edible Oil & Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.10.2005 & The Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act By Accepting The Returns. Subsequently The Cit Invoked His Suo Moto Revision Powers Under Section 263 Of The Act To Disallow The Additional Depreciation Claimed U/S 32(1)(Iia) Of The Act & Directed The Ao To Complete The Assessment De Novo By Considering The Claim Of Additional Depreciation Of 15%. Thereafter The Ld. Ao

90,000 MT for oil refinery only and during the year the appellant had installed a 300 Tons Per Day (TPD) fractionation plant. Merely because the installed capacity of the final product has not gone up it does not mean that the appellant is not eligible for additional depreciation. The only requirement as per section

M/S SKYLINE E TECH,KOCHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section. (ii) Whether the CIT(A) went wrong in disregarding the evidences produced by the appellant under the genuine belief that these records clearly establish beyond double that all the conditions have been complied with. 3.(i) Whether the CIT(A) errored in increasing the value of closing stock by Rs.57,00,000/- as against the valuation done at cost

M/S SKYLINE E TECH,KOCHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section. (ii) Whether the CIT(A) went wrong in disregarding the evidences produced by the appellant under the genuine belief that these records clearly establish beyond double that all the conditions have been complied with. 3.(i) Whether the CIT(A) errored in increasing the value of closing stock by Rs.57,00,000/- as against the valuation done at cost

M/S HIGH RANGE FOODS PRIVATE LTD,KOCHI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 1(3), KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dashigh Range Foods Pvt. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer 28/3030, Cheruparambath Road Corporate Ward – 1(3) Vs. Kadavanthra, Kochi 682020 Kochi [Pan:Aaach6076L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.M. Veeramani, Ca Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.12.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.06.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)], Disallowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dated 27.12.2017 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. The Appeal, Filed On 09.01.2023, Is Delayed By 135 Days. The Condonation Petition Accompanying The Appeal, Which Is Supported By A Sworn Affidavit Dated 29.12.2022 By Shri Simon John, The Director & Principal Officer Of The Assessee- Company, Explains The Delay In Terms Of Non-Conveyance Of The Impugned Order Inasmuch As It’S Uploading On The Itba Was Not Accompanied By A Simultaneous Uploading On The Mobile Application As Well As A Real Time Alert Through Sms, As Required By Clause 11 Of The National Faceless Appeal Scheme (Nfas), So That The Order Cannot Be Regarded As Served On 28.6.2022, The Date Of The Impugned Order And

depreciation, i.e. @25% p.a. The amount refundable thus reduces at a defined rate each passing year. This ascertained reduction in the amount refundable and, thus, the ceasing of the assessee’s liability qua deposit is regarded as it’s income by Revenue. How, one wonders, being axiomatic, could that be disputed, signify as it does the right to receive, case

APTIV CONNECTION SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI, KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1) KOCHI, KOCHI, KERALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

90% of the profit of Rs. 66,10,020/- under the provisions of sec. 10A of the Act. As such, the assessee has shown taxable profit of Rs. 7,42,159/- in its Bengaluru unit, which was set off against the losses incurred at Chennai and Cochin Units. The assessee computed the loss for its business

APTIV CONNECTION SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI, KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

90% of the profit of Rs. 66,10,020/- under the provisions of sec. 10A of the Act. As such, the assessee has shown taxable profit of Rs. 7,42,159/- in its Bengaluru unit, which was set off against the losses incurred at Chennai and Cochin Units. The assessee computed the loss for its business

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.FRIDGEHOUSE RETAIL P. LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

90,324 Advances & Deposits – Assets Closing WDV as on 31.03.2011 1,38,79,764 Less:Taken over by Fridgehouse 31,81,656 31,81,656 Retail Pvt. Ltd. Balance retained at Natesan Brothers 1,06,98,108 Total 12,48,86,934 His reasons for the same are as under: “The explanation offered by the assessee vide letter dated

MR.P.C.JOSE,,COCHIN vs. DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasp.C. Jose Deputy Commissioner Of Prop. Brothers Agencies Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Jews Street Vs. Kochi Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of P.C. Jose Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Prop. Brothers Agencies Kochi Vs. Jews Street Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 29.12.2010 for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. ITA Nos. 54& 84/Coch/2012 (AY: 2008-09) P.C. Jose v. Dy CIT / Dy. CIT v. P.C. Jose Ex-parte Order 2. The appeals were heard at length on 10.08.2023, covering all the issues, including the principal one, being the assessment