THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

23,508/- during the year under consideration, which was claimed as an exempt income under the provisions of the 1961 Act. The assesse admittedly did not made any suo- motu disallowance of expenditure under the provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act, being incurred in relation to earning of an income which does not form part of total income

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ERNAKULAM

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

23,508/- during the year under consideration, which was claimed as an exempt income under the provisions of the 1961 Act. The assesse admittedly did not made any suo- motu disallowance of expenditure under the provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act, being incurred in relation to earning of an income which does not form part of total income

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

23,508/- during the year under consideration, which was claimed as an exempt income under the provisions of the 1961 Act. The assesse admittedly did not made any suo- motu disallowance of expenditure under the provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act, being incurred in relation to earning of an income which does not form part of total income

LAXMI MEGHAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KANHANGAD vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, KANNUR, KANNUR

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year :2012-13 M/S. Laxmi Meghan Educational Trust, Ito (Exemptions), Vs. Kmc W1/1504, Surgicare Centre & Hospital, Kannur – 670 006. Kasargode District, Kerala. Pan :Aaatl8244M Assessee Respondent

sections 12AA and 10(23C) (vi). 3. The Id. CIT(A) has grievously erred in rejecting the prayer u/s. 10(23C) (iii ad) stating that " There are no documents on record to show that during the financial year under consideration, the assessee trust existed solely for educational propose and not for purposes of profit and that the aggregate annual receipts

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

23-12-1998 as under: "20.1 Section 37 of the Income-tax Act is amended to provide that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law shall not be deemed to have been incurred for the purposes of business or profession and no deduction or allowance shall be made

M/S.POPULAR FINANCE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

23-12-1998 as under: "20.1 Section 37 of the Income-tax Act is amended to provide that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law shall not be deemed to have been incurred for the purposes of business or profession and no deduction or allowance shall be made

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

23-12-1998 as under: "20.1 Section 37 of the Income-tax Act is amended to provide that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law shall not be deemed to have been incurred for the purposes of business or profession and no deduction or allowance shall be made

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

23,75,372 Rs.4,79,33,244 Rs.4,68,60,335 Disallowance u/s.14A -- Rs.97,00,000 Rs.83,34,000 being 0.5% of the average tax free investments Amount disallowed Rs.12,37,89,000 Rs.11,80,57,000 Rs.4,68,60,335 by Assessing Officer invoking Rule 8D 4. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) by orders all dated

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

23,75,372 Rs.4,79,33,244 Rs.4,68,60,335 Disallowance u/s.14A -- Rs.97,00,000 Rs.83,34,000 being 0.5% of the average tax free investments Amount disallowed Rs.12,37,89,000 Rs.11,80,57,000 Rs.4,68,60,335 by Assessing Officer invoking Rule 8D 4. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) by orders all dated

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

23,75,372 Rs.4,79,33,244 Rs.4,68,60,335 Disallowance u/s.14A -- Rs.97,00,000 Rs.83,34,000 being 0.5% of the average tax free investments Amount disallowed Rs.12,37,89,000 Rs.11,80,57,000 Rs.4,68,60,335 by Assessing Officer invoking Rule 8D 4. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) by orders all dated

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

23,75,372 Rs.4,79,33,244 Rs.4,68,60,335 Disallowance u/s.14A -- Rs.97,00,000 Rs.83,34,000 being 0.5% of the average tax free investments Amount disallowed Rs.12,37,89,000 Rs.11,80,57,000 Rs.4,68,60,335 by Assessing Officer invoking Rule 8D 4. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) by orders all dated

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

23,75,372 Rs.4,79,33,244 Rs.4,68,60,335 Disallowance u/s.14A -- Rs.97,00,000 Rs.83,34,000 being 0.5% of the average tax free investments Amount disallowed Rs.12,37,89,000 Rs.11,80,57,000 Rs.4,68,60,335 by Assessing Officer invoking Rule 8D 4. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) by orders all dated

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

23,75,372 Rs.4,79,33,244 Rs.4,68,60,335 Disallowance u/s.14A -- Rs.97,00,000 Rs.83,34,000 being 0.5% of the average tax free investments Amount disallowed Rs.12,37,89,000 Rs.11,80,57,000 Rs.4,68,60,335 by Assessing Officer invoking Rule 8D 4. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) by orders all dated

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance claim qua its golf course under the head “plant and machinery”. Learned A.R. not only drew strong support from the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion but also produced this tribunal’s coordinate bench’s order in Landbase India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 185 ITD 40 (Delhi) (Tribu.). Mr. Gopi takes as to para 6 therein that

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance claim qua its golf course under the head “plant and machinery”. Learned A.R. not only drew strong support from the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion but also produced this tribunal’s coordinate bench’s order in Landbase India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 185 ITD 40 (Delhi) (Tribu.). Mr. Gopi takes as to para 6 therein that

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance claim qua its golf course under the head “plant and machinery”. Learned A.R. not only drew strong support from the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion but also produced this tribunal’s coordinate bench’s order in Landbase India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 185 ITD 40 (Delhi) (Tribu.). Mr. Gopi takes as to para 6 therein that

THEDCIT, COCHIN vs. M.S COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance claim qua its golf course under the head “plant and machinery”. Learned A.R. not only drew strong support from the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion but also produced this tribunal’s coordinate bench’s order in Landbase India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 185 ITD 40 (Delhi) (Tribu.). Mr. Gopi takes as to para 6 therein that

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

23 of 2016 dated 06-10-2017 thereby not following the judicial discipline while allowing appeal of the assessee. 4. Further the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that as per section 45 S of the RBI Act and also per the provisions of the Partnership Act, 1932, the expense by way of interest incurred by the assessee-firm