K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

Disallowance of depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

Disallowance of depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

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

block of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which such search is conducted abates and the Assessing Officer shall have jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income of those assessment years on the basis of incriminating material found as a result of the search and any other material or information provided in the returns. In case

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

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

block of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which such search is conducted abates and the Assessing Officer shall have jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income of those assessment years on the basis of incriminating material found as a result of the search and any other material or information provided in the returns. In case

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

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

block of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which such search is conducted abates and the Assessing Officer shall have jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income of those assessment years on the basis of incriminating material found as a result of the search and any other material or information provided in the returns. In case

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

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

block of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which such search is conducted abates and the Assessing Officer shall have jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income of those assessment years on the basis of incriminating material found as a result of the search and any other material or information provided in the returns. In case

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

disallowance made u/s. 14A r.w.s. 8D of the I.T. Act. 4.1 The facts of the case are that the assessee had made investments in equity shares of following companies to the tune of Rs.13,81,88,297/- which remained intact during the block of assessment

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

disallowance made u/s. 14A r.w.s. 8D of the I.T. Act. 4.1 The facts of the case are that the assessee had made investments in equity shares of following companies to the tune of Rs.13,81,88,297/- which remained intact during the block of assessment

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

disallowance made u/s. 14A r.w.s. 8D of the I.T. Act. 4.1 The facts of the case are that the assessee had made investments in equity shares of following companies to the tune of Rs.13,81,88,297/- which remained intact during the block of assessment

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), THRRISSUR vs. MANJILAS AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD., THRISSUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

disallowance of Rs.3,21,911/- was upheld by the learned CIT stating that the same was not challenged in last year. Each year is a separate block of assessment

MANJILAS AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD,THRISSUR vs. THACIT,CIRCLE-1(1 ), THRISSUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

disallowance of Rs.3,21,911/- was upheld by the learned CIT stating that the same was not challenged in last year. Each year is a separate block of assessment

MANJILAS AGRO FOOD PVT.LTD.,THRISSUR vs. THE ITO,WARD-1(2),, THRISSUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

disallowance of Rs.3,21,911/- was upheld by the learned CIT stating that the same was not challenged in last year. Each year is a separate block of assessment

KK RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

block assessment.\"\n(emphasis added)\n16. As regards the contention of the assessee that no addition can be\nmade in the assessment made pursuant to notice u/s 153A, based on the\nstatement of third party placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi\nHigh Court in the case of Anand Kumar Jain, this contention cannot be\naccepted in view

KK RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

block assessment.\"\n(emphasis added)\n16. As regards the contention of the assessee that no addition can be\nmade in the assessment made pursuant to notice u/s 153A, based on the\nstatement of third party placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi\nHigh Court in the case of Anand Kumar Jain, this contention cannot be\naccepted in view

ACEELERATED FREEZE DRYING CO.LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. DCIT, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the appeal of the

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

block of asset are sold on which depreciation was allowed and not when the industrial undertaking with depreciable assets are sold as a whole. In fact, when Section 50B provides for computation of capital gain on the sale of the undertaking it covers capital gain payable on depreciable assets forming part of the industrial undertaking also. In other words

DCIT, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S ACEELERATED FREEZE DRYING CO, LTD, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the appeal of the

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

block of asset are sold on which depreciation was allowed and not when the industrial undertaking with depreciable assets are sold as a whole. In fact, when Section 50B provides for computation of capital gain on the sale of the undertaking it covers capital gain payable on depreciable assets forming part of the industrial undertaking also. In other words

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

disallow only 2% of expenses incurred towards exempted income. Thus, this ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Thus, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. ITA No. 61/Coch/2015 :Assessee’s Appeal : AY 2006-07 8. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Under Normal Provisions of the Income

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.ASPINWALL & CO. LTD, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

disallow only 2% of expenses incurred towards exempted income. Thus, this ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Thus, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. ITA No. 61/Coch/2015 :Assessee’s Appeal : AY 2006-07 8. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Under Normal Provisions of the Income