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.

disallowance of Rs 4,41,080 u/s 40 (a) (ia) and making an addition of Rs 5,73,799 as unexplained investment u/s 69 without appreciating the fact that the appellant is engaged in growing and sale of herbal plants and that the income derived is agricultural income which shall not include total by virtue of section

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.

disallowance of Rs 4,41,080 u/s 40 (a) (ia) and making an addition of Rs 5,73,799 as unexplained investment u/s 69 without appreciating the fact that the appellant is engaged in growing and sale of herbal plants and that the income derived is agricultural income which shall not include total by virtue of section

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.

disallowance of Rs 4,41,080 u/s 40 (a) (ia) and making an addition of Rs 5,73,799 as unexplained investment u/s 69 without appreciating the fact that the appellant is engaged in growing and sale of herbal plants and that the income derived is agricultural income which shall not include total by virtue of section

CONDIS INDIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance Condis India Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. u/s 14A of the Act. The relevant funding of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reads as under: - “41. Having regard to the language of Section

CONDIS INDIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance Condis India Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. u/s 14A of the Act. The relevant funding of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reads as under: - “41. Having regard to the language of Section

CONDIS INDIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

disallowance Condis India Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. u/s 14A of the Act. The relevant funding of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reads as under: - “41. Having regard to the language of Section

GEORGE KOCHUPARAMBIL, PROP. UNITED GRANITES & METALS,THODUPUZHA vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Juduicial Member & Ms. Padmavathy Sshri George Kochuparambil Kochuparambil House Dcit/Acit, Central Vazhithala P.O. Vs. Circle Thodupuzha Kochi Idukki 685583 Pan – Afjpk9650E Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Mathew Joseph, Ca Respondent By: Shri M. Jarasekhar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.03.2023

41,053/- is disallowed and added to the returned income u/s 37.” The argument made by the learned A.R. that since there is no disallowance made by the AO it has to be considered that the AO was satisfied with the claim of CSR expenses under Section

VALAPAD SERVICE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD,VALAPAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURUVAYUR

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowed the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act and added an income of Rs. 2,41,62,830 income

ASPINWALL AND COMPANY LTD,KOCHI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance only on the ground that so far as proportionate expenditure and administrative head(s) are concerned, the assessee was having sufficient interest free funs and the lower authorities herein ought to have only considered the exempt income yielding investments respectively. 4. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to direct the learned Assessing Officer to finalise his consequential

ASPINWALL AND COMPANY LTD,KOCHI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance only on the ground that so far as proportionate expenditure and administrative head(s) are concerned, the assessee was having sufficient interest free funs and the lower authorities herein ought to have only considered the exempt income yielding investments respectively. 4. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to direct the learned Assessing Officer to finalise his consequential

ASPINWALL AND COMPANY LTD,KOCHI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance only on the ground that so far as proportionate expenditure and administrative head(s) are concerned, the assessee was having sufficient interest free funs and the lower authorities herein ought to have only considered the exempt income yielding investments respectively. 4. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to direct the learned Assessing Officer to finalise his consequential

ASPINWALL AND COMPANY LTD,KOCHI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1) RANGE 1, KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance only on the ground that so far as proportionate expenditure and administrative head(s) are concerned, the assessee was having sufficient interest free funs and the lower authorities herein ought to have only considered the exempt income yielding investments respectively. 4. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to direct the learned Assessing Officer to finalise his consequential

ASPINWALL AND COMPANY LTD,KOCHI vs. THE DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance only on the ground that so far as proportionate expenditure and administrative head(s) are concerned, the assessee was having sufficient interest free funs and the lower authorities herein ought to have only considered the exempt income yielding investments respectively. 4. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to direct the learned Assessing Officer to finalise his consequential

MUTHOOT BANKERS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 14A r.w. rule 8D disallowance(s) amounting to Rs.88,68,993/- and Rs. 96,41,136/-; assessment year-wise

MUTHOOT BANKERS,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 14A r.w. rule 8D disallowance(s) amounting to Rs.88,68,993/- and Rs. 96,41,136/-; assessment year-wise

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE -1 (1), KOCHI vs. M/S GEOFIN COMTRADE LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

41(4) of the 1961 Act and, consequently, there is no merit in the contention that, if the assessee succeeds, then it would result in escapement of income from assessment.” (pg. 173) Reference here may profitably also be made to the decision in Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 343 ITR 270 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court

ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.GEOFIN COMTRADE LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

41(4) of the 1961 Act and, consequently, there is no merit in the contention that, if the assessee succeeds, then it would result in escapement of income from assessment.” (pg. 173) Reference here may profitably also be made to the decision in Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 343 ITR 270 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court

ANNA ALUMINIUM COMPANY (P) LTD.,ERNAKULAM vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX CORP.CIRCLE1(1), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Anna Aluminium Company (P) Ltd. .......... Appellant Kp 111 847, Kizhakkambalam, Aluva 683562 [Pan: Aafca6562R] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Harikrishnanunny, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sundarasan S., Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 26.08.2023 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of Companies Act. The Return Of Income For Ay 2017-18 Was Filed On 30.10.2017 Declaring Income Of Rs. 7,50,26,610/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Dcit, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 23.12.2019

disallowed the claim for bad debts written off of Rs. 5,03,26,576/- by holding that the appellant company had created only provision but actually not written off the debts. The AO also made addition of Rs. 21,70,211/- u/s. 41(1) of the Act by holding that sundry creditors are outstanding for more than three years