M/S.SOORYA DRUG HOUSE,THODUPUZHA vs. THE ITO,WD-2, THODUPUZHA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

127/- which comprised of disallowance of salary, estimated personal use of car and the defect in accounting sales. The appellant has neither concealed particulars of such income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of such income in the returns filed. Hence it is not a fit case to impose penalty and the order of dropping the penalty proceedings is not erroneous. Ground

M/S.SOORYA DRUG HOUSE,THODUPUZHA vs. THE ITO,WD-2, THODUPUZHA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

127/- which comprised of disallowance of salary, estimated personal use of car and the defect in accounting sales. The appellant has neither concealed particulars of such income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of such income in the returns filed. Hence it is not a fit case to impose penalty and the order of dropping the penalty proceedings is not erroneous. Ground

UZHAVA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO, WD-4, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. 3 M/s.Uzhava SCB Ltd. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds:- A. The Commissioner (Appeals) Kottayam ought to ha e considered hat he issue whether the assessing officer shall probe into the activities

ARTHUNKAL VILLAGE SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO,, ALAPPUZHA

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

disallowing the claim of the assessees u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessees have filed these appeals before the Tribunal raising the following identical grounds:- “A. The Commissioner (Appeals) Kottayam ought to have considered that the issue whether the assessing officer shall probe into the activities of a Co-operative

THE NADAKKAL SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, WD-4,, KOLLAM

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

disallowing the claim of the assessees u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. 5. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the assessees have filed these appeals before the Tribunal raising the following identical grounds:- “A. The Commissioner (Appeals) Kottayam ought to have considered that the issue whether the assessing officer shall probe into the activities of a Co-operative

SL PURAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO,, ALAPPUZHA

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

disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 80P(2) of the I.T.Act. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds:- “A. The Commissioner (Appeals) Kottayam ought to have considered that the issue whether the assessing officer shall probe into the activities of a Co-operative society

OLLUKKARA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE ITO, WD-2,(3), THRISSUR

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

Section 80P(4) is a matter to be decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the appeals [SLP (Civil) Diary No. 27628/2019] filed by the Co- operative Societies in Kerala, against the reference order dated 19/03/2019 of the Full Bench of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., vs. Income

BENEESH KUMAR,KOCHI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 1(1), KOCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Beneesh Kumar .......... Appellant Madathuparambu House, Thattzham Road Vaduthala, Kochi 682023 [Pan: Agipb7548Q] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Non-Corporate Ward, Kochi Appellant By: Shri Ramesh Cherian, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Omanakutan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2025

disallowed the claim for deduction u/s. 54 of the Act. 3. The factual background leading to the above addition is that during the previous year relevant to assessment year under consideration the appellant had sold immovable property for a consideration of Rs. 62,31,820/- which was purchased on 12.03.2004 for a consideration of Rs. 1,62,000/-. The appellant

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.29/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Kerala State Electricity Board, Income-Tax,Circle-1(1), Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Trivandrum. Trivandrum-695 004. [Pan:Aabck 5896J]

127 of 2010 dated 12/11/2010 pertaining to AYs 2002-03 to 2005-06 wherein it was held as under: “27. On a plain reading of section 43B we are of the opinion that the only clause if at all, is relevant in the context of the facts of the appellant’s case is clause (a) which deals with

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CIR-1(1), TVM, TVM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.29/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Kerala State Electricity Board, Income-Tax,Circle-1(1), Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattom, Trivandrum. Trivandrum-695 004. [Pan:Aabck 5896J]

127 of 2010 dated 12/11/2010 pertaining to AYs 2002-03 to 2005-06 wherein it was held as under: “27. On a plain reading of section 43B we are of the opinion that the only clause if at all, is relevant in the context of the facts of the appellant’s case is clause (a) which deals with

SMT.K.B.SONY,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, i) The appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

Section 36 deals with other deduction in respect of premium paid, interest etc. 3.7 In the present case, there is no allegation by the Assessing Officer that the sassessee has not incurred any expenditure. The only allegation is that the assessee has not rendered any services to M/s. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd. In our opinion when there

KAKKOTTAKATH NADUVILAPURAYIL JUNAID,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

KAKKOTTAKATH NADUVILAPURAYIL JUNAID,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

ABC BUILDWARES(P) LIMITED,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1`, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

KAKKOTTAKATH NADUVILAPURAYIL JUNAID,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

K.ABDUL VAHEED,TALIPARAMBA vs. ACIT(CENTRAL CIRCLE-1), KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

ABC BUILDWARES INDIA(P) LIMITED,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming

RUCHIT PARIMAL ASHAR,SANALA ROAD, MORBI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, which apply in cases of discrepancies in the books of accounts, were not invoked in this case. Therefore, we set aside the findings of the learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made by him. Consequently, the assessee’s ground of appeal is hereby allowed. 56. Coming