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

194C of the Act. Accordingly, the AO made addition of Rs. 6,01,35,577/- invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. While doing so, the AO rejected the contention of the appellant that in the assessment year 2008-09, in the assessment made pursuant to the order of remand made by the Hon'ble High Court

M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD,COCHIN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025

disallowance of charges paid to MPCMS towards professional charges made by the appellant for non deduction of tax at source on such payments invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 11. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had engaged services of an organization called MPCMS for rendering professional services in terms of agreement entered

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 AND TPS, KANNUR vs. KANNUR BUILDING MATERIALS CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, PAPPINISSERY, KANNUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps .......... Appellant Aayakar Bhavban, Chovva P.O., Kannur 670006 Vs. Kannur Building Materials Co-Op. Society Ltd .......... Respondent No. C 1741, Pappinissery P.O., Kannur 670561 [Pan: Aaaak7151K]

disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS under section 194C, we find

VISWANATHA SHENOY,ERNAKULAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2007-08

section 194C of Page 2 of 4 the Act and therefore the AO had issued a notice proposing to disallow

M/S KOTTAYAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80P deduction claim in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify all necessary facts, in consequential computation as per law. Ordered accordingly. 7. Our attention is next invited to the learned lower authorities action making sec.40(a)(ia) read with Rule 194C and sec.36(i)(viia) disallowance

M/S KOTTAYAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80P deduction claim in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify all necessary facts, in consequential computation as per law. Ordered accordingly. 7. Our attention is next invited to the learned lower authorities action making sec.40(a)(ia) read with Rule 194C and sec.36(i)(viia) disallowance

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before the CIT(A) and contended that the additions are not sustainable since the same were not based on any incriminating materials. In respect of addition made by disallowing the advertisement expenditure on account

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before the CIT(A) and contended that the additions are not sustainable since the same were not based on any incriminating materials. In respect of addition made by disallowing the advertisement expenditure on account

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before the CIT(A) and contended that the additions are not sustainable since the same were not based on any incriminating materials. In respect of addition made by disallowing the advertisement expenditure on account

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before the CIT(A) and contended that the additions are not sustainable since the same were not based on any incriminating materials. In respect of addition made by disallowing the advertisement expenditure on account

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

disallowance of Rs. 1,66,325/-u/s. 40(ia) against advertising payments, without looking into the law and facts of the case. TDS is applicable to payments to contractors, only when the payments are made in pursuance of a contract (Sec. 194C). In the present case, there is no such contract between the assessee Trust and advertising agencies. The advertisements