THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M.S COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

206 Taxman 242/19 taxmann.com 158 (Delhi). In the light of the aforesaid legal position the Appellant can well argue that since it had sufficient owned and interest- free funds to make investments during the impugned F.Y. 2008-09, even if he is not able to match entries of investments to interest free funds, no disallowances on account of interest

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

206 Taxman 242/19 taxmann.com 158 (Delhi). In the light of the aforesaid legal position the Appellant can well argue that since it had sufficient owned and interest- free funds to make investments during the impugned F.Y. 2008-09, even if he is not able to match entries of investments to interest free funds, no disallowances on account of interest

PLANT LIPIDS (P) LTD.,KADAYIRUPPU vs. DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(1), KOCHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2020-21 Plant Lipids (P) Ltd. Kadayiruppu Po Kolenchery Dcit, Vs. Kerala 682 311 Corporate Circle-2(1) Kochi Pan No : Aabcp6061C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Thomson Thomas, A.R. Respondent By : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2025 O R D E R Perkeshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ao, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Dated 19.6.2024 Vide Din No.Itba/Ast/S/143(3)/2024- 25/1065876641(1) For The Ay 2020-21 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: Plant Lipids (P) Ltd., Kolencherry, Kerala Page 2 Of 8

206/-. However, the disallowance proposed by the Assessing officer in the Draft Assessment Order in respect of deduction claimed u/s 80G of the Act amounting to Rs. 49,34,550/- in respect of donation made to eligible entities out of CSR Funds was upheld by the ld. DRP. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed the final Assessment Order

THE ITO, WD-2, GURUVAYUR vs. M/S.PUNNAYURKULAM SERVICE CO-OPBANK LTD, THRISSUR

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

disallowance of deduction of Rs. 82,77,206/- claimed by the assessee under section 80P(2) (a) (i) of the Act solely

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

206/- is disallowed relying on the decision of the Kerala High Court in the case of Rehabilitation Plantations Ltd. as reported in 251 CTR 343. (ii) In reply to the proposal for assessment, the assessee had filed detailed submissions a copy of which is annexed hereto as Annexure I which is at pages 1 to 8. In the said reply

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

206/- is disallowed relying on the decision of the Kerala High Court in the case of Rehabilitation Plantations Ltd. as reported in 251 CTR 343. (ii) In reply to the proposal for assessment, the assessee had filed detailed submissions a copy of which is annexed hereto as Annexure I which is at pages 1 to 8. In the said reply

DIADORA SHOES PVT LTD,CALICUT vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), CALICUT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Anil Kumar Dugar, Jm

section 32(1)(iia) of the Act was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2016 and hence the benefit of said explanation would be applicable to case pertaining to period A.Y. 2016-2017 and subsequent year, vide order dated 06.01.2023. 6. Being aggrieved by the said appellate order dated 06.01.2023 the assessee instituted the instant appeal by challenging such disallowance on the following grounds

M/S INDITRADE CAPITAL LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS ,KOCHI vs. THE ITO, CORPORATE WARD1(1),, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the appellant made a claim for allowance of depreciation at the rate of 25% of the sum paid, placing reliance on the following decisions :- (i) Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DDCIT, Tax case (Appeals) No.1195 by Hon’ble Madras High Court. (ii) Ind Global Corporate Fiannce (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2013) 33 taxmann.com

M/S INDITRADE CAPITAL LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS "JRG SECURITIES LTD"),KOCHI vs. THE ITO, CORPORATE WARD1(1),, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the appellant made a claim for allowance of depreciation at the rate of 25% of the sum paid, placing reliance on the following decisions :- (i) Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DDCIT, Tax case (Appeals) No.1195 by Hon’ble Madras High Court. (ii) Ind Global Corporate Fiannce (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2013) 33 taxmann.com

M/S INDITRADE CAPITAL LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS ,KOCHI vs. THE ITO, CORPORATE WARD1(1),, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the appellant made a claim for allowance of depreciation at the rate of 25% of the sum paid, placing reliance on the following decisions :- (i) Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DDCIT, Tax case (Appeals) No.1195 by Hon’ble Madras High Court. (ii) Ind Global Corporate Fiannce (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2013) 33 taxmann.com

M/S INDITRADE CAPITAL LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS ,KOCHI vs. THE ITO, CORPORATE WARD1(1),, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the appellant made a claim for allowance of depreciation at the rate of 25% of the sum paid, placing reliance on the following decisions :- (i) Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DDCIT, Tax case (Appeals) No.1195 by Hon’ble Madras High Court. (ii) Ind Global Corporate Fiannce (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2013) 33 taxmann.com

M/S INDITRADE CAPITAL LTD (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS ,KOCHI vs. THE ITO, CORPORATE WARD1(1),, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the appellant made a claim for allowance of depreciation at the rate of 25% of the sum paid, placing reliance on the following decisions :- (i) Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DDCIT, Tax case (Appeals) No.1195 by Hon’ble Madras High Court. (ii) Ind Global Corporate Fiannce (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2013) 33 taxmann.com

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,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

206 24,59,126 Corporation Ltd. TOTAL 48,13,52,780 3,16,52,119 I.T.A. Nos.37 to 49/Coch/2016 3.9.3 For the assessment year 2011-12, in the case of M/s. Vijayalaxmi Cashew Co., as per details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold various grades of cashew kernels to concerns owned by near

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,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

206 24,59,126 Corporation Ltd. TOTAL 48,13,52,780 3,16,52,119 I.T.A. Nos.37 to 49/Coch/2016 3.9.3 For the assessment year 2011-12, in the case of M/s. Vijayalaxmi Cashew Co., as per details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold various grades of cashew kernels to concerns owned by near

SMT. T.C. USHA,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

206 24,59,126 Corporation Ltd. TOTAL 48,13,52,780 3,16,52,119 I.T.A. Nos.37 to 49/Coch/2016 3.9.3 For the assessment year 2011-12, in the case of M/s. Vijayalaxmi Cashew Co., as per details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold various grades of cashew kernels to concerns owned by near

SRI.K.RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR,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

206 24,59,126 Corporation Ltd. TOTAL 48,13,52,780 3,16,52,119 I.T.A. Nos.37 to 49/Coch/2016 3.9.3 For the assessment year 2011-12, in the case of M/s. Vijayalaxmi Cashew Co., as per details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold various grades of cashew kernels to concerns owned by near

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

206 24,59,126 Corporation Ltd. TOTAL 48,13,52,780 3,16,52,119 I.T.A. Nos.37 to 49/Coch/2016 3.9.3 For the assessment year 2011-12, in the case of M/s. Vijayalaxmi Cashew Co., as per details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold various grades of cashew kernels to concerns owned by near

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,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

206 24,59,126 Corporation Ltd. TOTAL 48,13,52,780 3,16,52,119 I.T.A. Nos.37 to 49/Coch/2016 3.9.3 For the assessment year 2011-12, in the case of M/s. Vijayalaxmi Cashew Co., as per details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold various grades of cashew kernels to concerns owned by near