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

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

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

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

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

1). It is seen that the department resists any new or subsequent claim in the return filed under section 153A, primarily on the plea that such assessments are for the benefit of the revenue rather than the assessee. The predominant view of the department in this regard is the return filed under section 153A is a consequence of search action

KK RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

disallowed.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "132", "153A", "69C", "153D", "143(3)" ], "issues": "1. Whether the approval granted by the JCIT under

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance made. 10. The Ld.DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that in the case law relied on by the ld AR Meeta Gutgutia (supra) it is held that – 60. In Kabul Chawla (supra), the Court also took note of the decision

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

153A for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2008- 09 and under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 2009-10 4 ITA Nos.207/Coch/2019 & Ors. Reena Jose & Ors. in relation to the persons who were searched, namely, Gracy Babu, Jose Thomas and P.J. Paulose, who were the heads of the respective trustee families. No assessments in consequence to search were

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

153A for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2008- 09 and under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 2009-10 4 ITA Nos.207/Coch/2019 & Ors. Reena Jose & Ors. in relation to the persons who were searched, namely, Gracy Babu, Jose Thomas and P.J. Paulose, who were the heads of the respective trustee families. No assessments in consequence to search were

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

153A for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2008- 09 and under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 2009-10 4 ITA Nos.207/Coch/2019 & Ors. Reena Jose & Ors. in relation to the persons who were searched, namely, Gracy Babu, Jose Thomas and P.J. Paulose, who were the heads of the respective trustee families. No assessments in consequence to search were

MRS.REENA JOSE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

153A for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2008- 09 and under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 2009-10 4 ITA Nos.207/Coch/2019 & Ors. Reena Jose & Ors. in relation to the persons who were searched, namely, Gracy Babu, Jose Thomas and P.J. Paulose, who were the heads of the respective trustee families. No assessments in consequence to search were

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

153A for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2008- 09 and under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 2009-10 4 ITA Nos.207/Coch/2019 & Ors. Reena Jose & Ors. in relation to the persons who were searched, namely, Gracy Babu, Jose Thomas and P.J. Paulose, who were the heads of the respective trustee families. No assessments in consequence to search were

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

153A should have been initiated and completed for the year under reference. The appellant's submission that the corrections in the sales bills during the year, alleged by the department to be editing for suppression, are only genuine transactions carried out during the year, which is also evident from the sufficiency of gross profit returned, correctness of stock, cash

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

153A should have been initiated and completed for the year under reference. The appellant's submission that the corrections in the sales bills during the year, alleged by the department to be editing for suppression, are only genuine transactions carried out during the year, which is also evident from the sufficiency of gross profit returned, correctness of stock, cash