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

disallowance of expenditure was earlier made by the AO vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 for ay: 2010-11, by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962(hereinafter called “ the Rules”) . The AO had observed that the assessee had made investmentsyielding exempt income , aggregating to Rs.69,54

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

disallowance of expenditure was earlier made by the AO vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 for ay: 2010-11, by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962(hereinafter called “ the Rules”) . The AO had observed that the assessee had made investmentsyielding exempt income , aggregating to Rs.69,54

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

disallowance of expenditure was earlier made by the AO vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 for ay: 2010-11, by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962(hereinafter called “ the Rules”) . The AO had observed that the assessee had made investmentsyielding exempt income , aggregating to Rs.69,54

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

disallowance of expenditure was earlier made by the AO vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 for ay: 2010-11, by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962(hereinafter called “ the Rules”) . The AO had observed that the assessee had made investmentsyielding exempt income , aggregating to Rs.69,54

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

disallowance of expenditure was earlier made by the AO vide assessment order dated 26.03.2014 for ay: 2010-11, by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the 1961 Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962(hereinafter called “ the Rules”) . The AO had observed that the assessee had made investmentsyielding exempt income , aggregating to Rs.69,54

THEDCIT, COCHIN vs. M.S COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under the corresponding statute than going by the “due” date of filing the return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Suffice to say, case law Checkmate Services (P) Ltd., vs. CIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under the corresponding statute than going by the “due” date of filing the return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Suffice to say, case law Checkmate Services (P) Ltd., vs. CIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under the corresponding statute than going by the “due” date of filing the return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Suffice to say, case law Checkmate Services (P) Ltd., vs. CIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 36(1)(va) disallowance on the ground that the assessee ought to have credited the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI within the specified due date under the corresponding statute than going by the “due” date of filing the return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Suffice to say, case law Checkmate Services (P) Ltd., vs. CIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance of Rs.8,39,91,691 representing long term finance made available to the “eligible business” in the relevant assessment years. The tribunal’s earlier order (supra) has also dealt with the very same issue of section 36(1)(viii) deduction in assessee’s favour and against the Revenue, as under:- “23. The only other issue that remains for consideration

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance of Rs.8,39,91,691 representing long term finance made available to the “eligible business” in the relevant assessment years. The tribunal’s earlier order (supra) has also dealt with the very same issue of section 36(1)(viii) deduction in assessee’s favour and against the Revenue, as under:- “23. The only other issue that remains for consideration

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance of Rs.8,39,91,691 representing long term finance made available to the “eligible business” in the relevant assessment years. The tribunal’s earlier order (supra) has also dealt with the very same issue of section 36(1)(viii) deduction in assessee’s favour and against the Revenue, as under:- “23. The only other issue that remains for consideration

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance of Rs.8,39,91,691 representing long term finance made available to the “eligible business” in the relevant assessment years. The tribunal’s earlier order (supra) has also dealt with the very same issue of section 36(1)(viii) deduction in assessee’s favour and against the Revenue, as under:- “23. The only other issue that remains for consideration

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance of Rs.8,39,91,691 representing long term finance made available to the “eligible business” in the relevant assessment years. The tribunal’s earlier order (supra) has also dealt with the very same issue of section 36(1)(viii) deduction in assessee’s favour and against the Revenue, as under:- “23. The only other issue that remains for consideration

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance of Rs.8,39,91,691 representing long term finance made available to the “eligible business” in the relevant assessment years. The tribunal’s earlier order (supra) has also dealt with the very same issue of section 36(1)(viii) deduction in assessee’s favour and against the Revenue, as under:- “23. The only other issue that remains for consideration

ACIT, KOCHI vs. FEDERAL BANK LTD, ALUVA

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

disallowance of deduction on account of provision for leave encashment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries 116 Taxmann.com 378 (SC) on 24 April 2020, in Civil Appeal 3545/2009 overruled the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries and upheld the constitutional validity for deduction of leave encashment on payment basis under

THE FEDERAL BANK LTD,ALUVA vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

disallowance of deduction on account of provision for leave encashment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries 116 Taxmann.com 378 (SC) on 24 April 2020, in Civil Appeal 3545/2009 overruled the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries and upheld the constitutional validity for deduction of leave encashment on payment basis under

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, ERNAKULAM

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

disallowance of deduction on account of provision for leave encashment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries 116 Taxmann.com 378 (SC) on 24 April 2020, in Civil Appeal 3545/2009 overruled the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries and upheld the constitutional validity for deduction of leave encashment on payment basis under