THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) is not justified in treating the interest received from cooperative banks as income from other sources and disallowing the claim u/s 8OP. The Commissioner (Appeals) should have appreciated that the appellant is a PrimaryAgricultural CreditSociety engaged in the business ofaccepting deposits from members and providing loans to members. The Commissioner (Appeals) was bound by the decision

AVINISSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1),THRISSUR, THRISSUR

disallow deductions claimed under section 80P of the\nIncome-tax Act, notwithstanding that mere nomenclature or registration\ncertificates issued under the Kerala Act would show that the assessees\nare primary agricultural credit societies. These divergent decisions led to\na reference order dated 9-7-2018 to a Full Bench of the Kerala High\nCourt.\n5. The Full Bench

THE ADIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

section 2(15) cannot be applied to assessee to deny exemption u/s 11 of the Act. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the submissions of the ld. DR so as to disturb the finding of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, we uphold the order of ld. CIT(A) by dismissing

THE DIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

section 2(15) cannot be applied to assessee to deny exemption u/s 11 of the Act. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the submissions of the ld. DR so as to disturb the finding of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, we uphold the order of ld. CIT(A) by dismissing

M/S ASPINWALL & CO.,LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

disallowance can be made under section 14A of the Act. Sub-sections (2) and (3) were inserted by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from April 1, 2007. However, the expression "such method as may be prescribed" got meaning only by the introduction of rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Sub-section (2) of section

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

disallowance can be made under section 14A of the Act. Sub-sections (2) and (3) were inserted by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from April 1, 2007. However, the expression "such method as may be prescribed" got meaning only by the introduction of rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Sub-section (2) of section

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

disallowance can be made under section 14A of the Act. Sub-sections (2) and (3) were inserted by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from April 1, 2007. However, the expression "such method as may be prescribed" got meaning only by the introduction of rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Sub-section (2) of section

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.ASPINWALL & CO. LTD, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

disallowance can be made under section 14A of the Act. Sub-sections (2) and (3) were inserted by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from April 1, 2007. However, the expression "such method as may be prescribed" got meaning only by the introduction of rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Sub-section (2) of section

AYUR GREEN AYURVEDA HOSPITALS PRIVATE LIMITED,MALAPPURAM vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmiayurgreen Ayurveda Hospsitals Vs Dcit, Private Limited Cpc, Door No. 1/301 Ayurgreen Bengaluru. Ayurveda Hospitals, Kaladi Mlp Edappal, Malappuram-679585. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaica 4294 M

section 2(24(x). 6. This issue was raised in a prominent newspapers at that time. The said newspaper cuttings has been attached herewith for your kind perusal and records. 7. The proposed disallowance

THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ACIT, KOTTAYAM

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

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

section 10, is not includible in the total income. ITA Nos.1-2/Coch/2020 4 M/s.Plantation Corporation of Kerala Ltd. 1. The finding of the Kerala High Court could be found to be inconsistent with the provision and reality in plantation based on the following arguments” The findings in the judgment are narrated in bold: (a) Rule 7A(2) only provides for deduction

THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ACIT, KOTTAYAM

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

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

section 10, is not includible in the total income. ITA Nos.1-2/Coch/2020 4 M/s.Plantation Corporation of Kerala Ltd. 1. The finding of the Kerala High Court could be found to be inconsistent with the provision and reality in plantation based on the following arguments” The findings in the judgment are narrated in bold: (a) Rule 7A(2) only provides for deduction

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi is not justified in deleting the disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of Rs.1,83,55,106/-. 3 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee had huge value of investments capable of earning exempt income and disallowed no expenditure attributable to such investments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi is not justified in deleting the disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of Rs.1,83,55,106/-. 3 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee had huge value of investments capable of earning exempt income and disallowed no expenditure attributable to such investments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi is not justified in deleting the disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of Rs.1,83,55,106/-. 3 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee had huge value of investments capable of earning exempt income and disallowed no expenditure attributable to such investments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ERNAKULAM

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi is not justified in deleting the disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of Rs.1,83,55,106/-. 3 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee had huge value of investments capable of earning exempt income and disallowed no expenditure attributable to such investments

THE DCIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.SFO TECHNOLOGIES P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi is not justified in deleting the disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of Rs.1,83,55,106/-. 3 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee had huge value of investments capable of earning exempt income and disallowed no expenditure attributable to such investments

VADAKKEVILA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act as the income is incidental to the business and is reportable under "Profits and Gains of Business/Profession" 8. Without prejudice to, ground number 6 and 7, interest paid to members of the society for deposits is eligible for deduction as expense against interest received for deposits from a co- operative

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

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

disallow the loss on sale of cashew kernels incurred by the assessee through such dealings and the loss was worked out as follows: Sl. Name of sister Quantity sold Sale Price Average Cost of Cost of Difference No concern (in Kg.) rate of production goods sold (Co. 7-4) . sale (Col. 3x6) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7