M/S.COOL MINDS TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: CIT(A) the it was claimed by the Assessee that deduction under Section 10B of the Act was initially claimed by the Assessee under the bona fide belief that it is entitled to deduction under Section 10B of the Act. The CITT(A) dismissed the appeal of the Assessee agreeing with the Assessing Officer and holding that the Assessing Officer was justified in not considering the claim made by the Assessee under Section 10A of the Act. Now the Assessee is in

disallowed the deduction claimed under Section 10A of the Act. Before CIT(A) the it was claimed by the Assessee that deduction under Section 10B of the Act was initially claimed by the Assessee under the bona fide belief that it is entitled to deduction under Section 10B of the Act. The CITT(A) dismissed the appeal of the Assessee

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions

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

10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the Head ‘C- Deductions in respect of certain income’, no deduction shall be allowed to them. Further, the provisions of section 80AC deal with deductions not to be allowed unless return of income is furnished and as per the said provisions

THE ITO, COCHIN vs. M/S.PESCAINDE, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objections of the

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

disallowed. I.T.A. Nos. 227-229/Coch/2019 & C.O. Nos. 26 to 28/Coch/2019 4.2 Regarding claim for exemption u/s. 10A, according to the Assessing Officer as per Section 10A(2) clauses (i) to (iii) in order to avail exemption under section 10A, the assessee has to fulfill the following conditions: Section 10A(2): This section applies to any undertaking which fulfills

M/S.ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. JTCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

disallowance of deduction u/s. 10B was upheld. Regarding alternate claim of deduction u/s. 10A, the DRP confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer. 13.3 Against this, the assessee is in appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that the DRP and the A.O. was bound to examine and grant the alternative claim u/s. 10A of the Act to the assessee

THE JT CIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. ALLIANZ CORNHILL INFORMATION SERVICES P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

disallowance of deduction u/s. 10B was upheld. Regarding alternate claim of deduction u/s. 10A, the DRP confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer. 13.3 Against this, the assessee is in appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that the DRP and the A.O. was bound to examine and grant the alternative claim u/s. 10A of the Act to the assessee

THE KADAVALUR SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED NO3821,THRISSUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, GURUVAYUR

In the result, the appeal and Stay Application filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Stay Application No. 150/Coch/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 637/Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2008-09)

disallowance made by the ld. A.O. on this ground. It is pertinent to point out that the first appellate authority has not decided the section 80P deduction on the merits as to whether the assessee is a Co-operative Bank or a PACS as claimed by the assessee. The assessee, on the other hand, contended that

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

5 M/s.Krythium Solutions Pvt.Ltd. accepted in the initial years after completion of scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, the rejection of the entire claim in re-assessment proceeding becomes bad in law. (Refer: Hi-Tech Outsourcing Services v. CIT - Judgment dated 18.09.2018 by the High Court of Gujarat)” 6. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand

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

5 M/s.Krythium Solutions Pvt.Ltd. accepted in the initial years after completion of scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, the rejection of the entire claim in re-assessment proceeding becomes bad in law. (Refer: Hi-Tech Outsourcing Services v. CIT - Judgment dated 18.09.2018 by the High Court of Gujarat)” 6. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand

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

5 M/s.Krythium Solutions Pvt.Ltd. accepted in the initial years after completion of scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, the rejection of the entire claim in re-assessment proceeding becomes bad in law. (Refer: Hi-Tech Outsourcing Services v. CIT - Judgment dated 18.09.2018 by the High Court of Gujarat)” 6. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand

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

5 M/s.Krythium Solutions Pvt.Ltd. accepted in the initial years after completion of scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, the rejection of the entire claim in re-assessment proceeding becomes bad in law. (Refer: Hi-Tech Outsourcing Services v. CIT - Judgment dated 18.09.2018 by the High Court of Gujarat)” 6. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand

THE ITO,, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.EXTRAWEAVE P. LTD, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Extraweave Pvt. Ltd. Arattukulangara Complex 264B/Cmc 1 Vs. A.N. Puram, Alapuzha 688011 Sakteeswara Junction Cherthala 688524 Pan – Aabce5438L Appellant Respondent

disallowed the amount. The learned CIT(A), after considering the judgement quoted in his order, allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Considering the rival submissions we observed that the CIT(A) has decided the issue as under: - “8. I have considered the issue, arguments advanced and the case laws cited. Apparently, it is not in dispute that the payments

PULPATTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ITO WARD-2, TIRUR, TIRUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

section 10A of the Act by the CIT(Appeals), without there being a revised return is illegal and untenable.” (emphasis, ours) Sh. Rishal,the ld. counsel for the assessee, on being questioned by the Bench during hearing, could not meet the said reliance by the ld. CIT(A). His reliance on the decision by the Tribunal in Krushi Vibhag Karmachari

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowing section 10A deduction of Rs.56,48,936/- which has been upheld in the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion as under: - “4.2 Ground No. 2 relates to addition at Rs. 56,48,936/- on account of excess deduction claimed u/s 10A of the Act. The appellant is a private limited company engaged in the manufacturing of connectors, providing computer aided

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowing section 10A deduction of Rs.56,48,936/- which has been upheld in the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion as under: - “4.2 Ground No. 2 relates to addition at Rs. 56,48,936/- on account of excess deduction claimed u/s 10A of the Act. The appellant is a private limited company engaged in the manufacturing of connectors, providing computer aided

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowing section 10A deduction of Rs.56,48,936/- which has been upheld in the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion as under: - “4.2 Ground No. 2 relates to addition at Rs. 56,48,936/- on account of excess deduction claimed u/s 10A of the Act. The appellant is a private limited company engaged in the manufacturing of connectors, providing computer aided