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

reopening of assessment and it is only a change of opinion, accordingly by placing above judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we quash the assessment for the assessment year 2010-11 also. A.Y. 2013-14: 12. Ground No.2 in this appeal ITA No.91/Coch/2022 is as follows:- 2. “The appellant had claimed before the Assessing Officer that the amount that

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

reopening of assessment and it is only a change of opinion, accordingly by placing above judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we quash the assessment for the assessment year 2010-11 also. A.Y. 2013-14: 12. Ground No.2 in this appeal ITA No.91/Coch/2022 is as follows:- 2. “The appellant had claimed before the Assessing Officer that the amount that

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JCIT, TRIVANDRUM

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

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

reopening of assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act was completed vide order dated 17.03.2015. In the reassessment completed, the exemption claimed u/s 10B / 10A of the I.T.Act was disallowed

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

reopening of the assessment. 5. Against this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The issue regarding reasons recorded for the re-opening of the assessment by the Assessing Officer was already a subject matter of appeal before

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

reopening of the assessment. 5. Against this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The issue regarding reasons recorded for the re-opening of the assessment by the Assessing Officer was already a subject matter of appeal before

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Assessing Officer is indeed justified in invoking his 148 reopening jurisdiction in these peculiar facts. The assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground fails in very terms therefore. 5. Next comes the assessee’s second substantive ground seeking to reverse both lower authorities action making u/s.14A read with Rule 8D disallowance

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Assessing Officer is indeed justified in invoking his 148 reopening jurisdiction in these peculiar facts. The assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground fails in very terms therefore. 5. Next comes the assessee’s second substantive ground seeking to reverse both lower authorities action making u/s.14A read with Rule 8D disallowance

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Assessing Officer is indeed justified in invoking his 148 reopening jurisdiction in these peculiar facts. The assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground fails in very terms therefore. 5. Next comes the assessee’s second substantive ground seeking to reverse both lower authorities action making u/s.14A read with Rule 8D disallowance

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Assessing Officer is indeed justified in invoking his 148 reopening jurisdiction in these peculiar facts. The assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground fails in very terms therefore. 5. Next comes the assessee’s second substantive ground seeking to reverse both lower authorities action making u/s.14A read with Rule 8D disallowance

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Assessing Officer is indeed justified in invoking his 148 reopening jurisdiction in these peculiar facts. The assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground fails in very terms therefore. 5. Next comes the assessee’s second substantive ground seeking to reverse both lower authorities action making u/s.14A read with Rule 8D disallowance

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Assessing Officer is indeed justified in invoking his 148 reopening jurisdiction in these peculiar facts. The assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground fails in very terms therefore. 5. Next comes the assessee’s second substantive ground seeking to reverse both lower authorities action making u/s.14A read with Rule 8D disallowance

DCIT,, ERNAKULAM vs. JOJO FROZEN FOODS P.LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance of the lapsed liability on account of freezer deposit for the period prior to AY 2006-07 already got lapsed.” 7.5 The Assessing Officer has not mentioned nor established that the re-assessment is proposed due to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts which is a pre-condition when

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K

reopening of assessment, the learned DR submitted that the issue was not raised before the A.O. nor CIT(A). 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. For the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2009-2010, the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 10B of the I.T.Act in the original return of income and same

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K

reopening of assessment, the learned DR submitted that the issue was not raised before the A.O. nor CIT(A). 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. For the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2009-2010, the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 10B of the I.T.Act in the original return of income and same

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K

reopening of assessment, the learned DR submitted that the issue was not raised before the A.O. nor CIT(A). 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. For the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2009-2010, the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 10B of the I.T.Act in the original return of income and same

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri George George K

reopening of assessment, the learned DR submitted that the issue was not raised before the A.O. nor CIT(A). 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. For the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2009-2010, the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 10B of the I.T.Act in the original return of income and same

KINGS INFRA VENTURES LTD,THEVARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1 (2), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainkings Infra Ventures Ltd. Asstt. Commissioner Of A-1, 1St Floor, Atria Apartment Income Tax, Opp. Gurudwara Temple Vs. Circle - 1(2) Perumanur Road Kochi Thevara, Kochi [Pan:Aaccv3411D] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. Advocate Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R.

reopen the assessment proceedings for the assessment years impacted. Besides, and needless to say, if the assessment or re- assessment for the preceding AY 2010-11 serves to disallow

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.

reopening the assessment. The AO is also directed to keep in mind the ITA Nos.32 to 34/Coch/2022 Page 7 of 18 decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court (supra) and decide the issue accordingly. 8. In the appeal for AY 2011-12, the assessee has contented the impugned issue only on legal grounds and accordingly we have adjudicated only