THE MAHADEVIKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO WARD 5 , ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

disallowed the assessee's claim under section 80P by wrongly holding that the assessee had not filed any return of income for the year. 5. The CIT[A] should have considered the return of income filed by the assessee and granted the deduction under section 80P as claimed in the return. 5. The CIT[A] should have noted that

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 40(a)(iib) is satisfied, no disallowance could be made u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the act. In the interest of justice, we remit this issue back to the Ld.AO to carry out a de novo assessment. The Ld.AO is directed to carry out Page 8 of 8 ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Coch/2023 necessary verification by issuing 133(6

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 40(a)(iib) is satisfied, no disallowance could be made u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the act. In the interest of justice, we remit this issue back to the Ld.AO to carry out a de novo assessment. The Ld.AO is directed to carry out Page 8 of 8 ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Coch/2023 necessary verification by issuing 133(6

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 40(a)(iib) is satisfied, no disallowance could be made u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the act. In the interest of justice, we remit this issue back to the Ld.AO to carry out a de novo assessment. The Ld.AO is directed to carry out Page 8 of 8 ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Coch/2023 necessary verification by issuing 133(6

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 40(a)(iib) is satisfied, no disallowance could be made u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the act. In the interest of justice, we remit this issue back to the Ld.AO to carry out a de novo assessment. The Ld.AO is directed to carry out Page 8 of 8 ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Coch/2023 necessary verification by issuing 133(6

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

section 40(a)(iib) is satisfied, no disallowance could be made u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the act. In the interest of justice, we remit this issue back to the Ld.AO to carry out a de novo assessment. The Ld.AO is directed to carry out Page 8 of 8 ITA Nos. 133 to 137/Coch/2023 necessary verification by issuing 133(6

SYEDALI EBRAHIM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO WARD-1(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

133(6) is factually incorrect, as the bank had sanctioned the loan to the appellant and has issued a confirmation letter to this effect. F. The appellant craves to add, modify, substitute, alter or delete any of the grounds in this appeal.” 3. The relevant facts in brief are that the Assessment for the Assessment Year 2016-17 was framed

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the AO, for AY 2008-09, pursuant to the remand order

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the AO, for AY 2008-09, pursuant to the remand order

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 7. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that the AO, for AY 2008-09, pursuant to the remand order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), ERNAKULAM vs. ISLAMIC LEARNING MISSION TRUST, KERALA

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 11(1)(d) of the IT act and that the trust had received corpus donations and the details of the donors and the original certificates were produced for verification during the course of the assessment proceedings. Also, the trust had maintained a general donation receipt book and received general donations as well as specific donations and the trust would

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KANNUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

6. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has observed that the revenue has not disputed the fact that there is no discrepancy with regard to quantitative details of the stock items and that the only difference is with regard to adopting the value of closing stock. The Tribunal placed

ABC BUILDWAERS 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

6. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has observed that the revenue has not disputed the fact that there is no discrepancy with regard to quantitative details of the stock items and that the only difference is with regard to adopting the value of closing stock. The Tribunal placed

RUCHIT PARIMAL ASHAR,SANALA ROAD, MORBI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

6. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has observed that the revenue has not disputed the fact that there is no discrepancy with regard to quantitative details of the stock items and that the only difference is with regard to adopting the value of closing stock. The Tribunal placed

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

6. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has observed that the revenue has not disputed the fact that there is no discrepancy with regard to quantitative details of the stock items and that the only difference is with regard to adopting the value of closing stock. The Tribunal placed

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

6. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has observed that the revenue has not disputed the fact that there is no discrepancy with regard to quantitative details of the stock items and that the only difference is with regard to adopting the value of closing stock. The Tribunal placed

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

6. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has observed that the revenue has not disputed the fact that there is no discrepancy with regard to quantitative details of the stock items and that the only difference is with regard to adopting the value of closing stock. The Tribunal placed

ABC SALES CORPORATION,KASARAGOD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

6. The Tribunal in the impugned order has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and has observed that the revenue has not disputed the fact that there is no discrepancy with regard to quantitative details of the stock items and that the only difference is with regard to adopting the value of closing stock. The Tribunal placed