M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: I.T.A. Nos. 202-204/Coch/2019 "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI has passed an order giving adverse

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS,, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI has passed an order giving adverse

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI has passed an order giving adverse

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI has passed an order giving adverse

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI has passed an order giving adverse

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI has passed an order giving adverse

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

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

disallowed. 4.3.2. Similar issue was before Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (India) Securities Ltd. in ITA No.7354/Mum/2004 and the Tribunal held vide its order dated 06/03/2013 as under: "9. .............The main contention of the department in denying the claim of the interest expenditure is that the SEBI has passed an order giving adverse

MR.THOMAS DANIEL,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.68/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

disallowance of Rs 67, 30, 90,917/- u/s 40(a)(ia) being payment of interest on borrowed funds from firms in which appellant is a partner without TDS u/s 194A. The Ld. AR submitted that Section I94A does not apply to individuals unless he is a person liable to tax audit u/s 44AB

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal & Shri George George K.Assessment Year:2011- 12

disallowance made under section 14A. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [2000] 243 ITR 83, at page 88 has categorically held as under: “In the instant case, the Commissioner noted that the Income Tax Officer passed the order of nil assessment without application of mind. Indeed, the High Court recorded the finding

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

67 ITR 95 (SC) vi. DECTA 237 ITR 190 AAR vii. ABB Ltd. 189 Taxmann 422 viii. Ernst and Young Ltd. 49 taxmann.com 386 (Kolkata ITAT) 13. We carefully considered the submissions made by the appellant. On mere perusal of the assessment order, it would reveal that the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) was made by the AO solely

KERALA STATE BEVERAGES M&M) CORPN LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, CIR-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assesse as well as the Stay Petition

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

67,890/-. The assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act was completed on 28/12/2017 by disallowing the following expenses u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the Act. S. No. Item Amount (Rs.) 1 Gallonage fee 54,83,87,000 2 License fee 5,75,00,000 3 Shop Rental (Kist) 199,71,00,000 4 Surcharge on Sales

M/S.KERALA STATE BEVERAGES(M&M) CORPORATION LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assesse as well as the Stay Petition

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

67,890/-. The assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act was completed on 28/12/2017 by disallowing the following expenses u/s. 40(a)(iib) of the Act. S. No. Item Amount (Rs.) 1 Gallonage fee 54,83,87,000 2 License fee 5,75,00,000 3 Shop Rental (Kist) 199,71,00,000 4 Surcharge on Sales

M/S.MUTHOOT BANKERS,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

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

67,945/- I.T.A. Nos.92 & 93/Coch/2015 5. On appeal, the CIT(A) referred to the provisions of section 14A: 14A (1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not for part of the total income under this

M/S.MUTHOOT BANKERS,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

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

67,945/- I.T.A. Nos.92 & 93/Coch/2015 5. On appeal, the CIT(A) referred to the provisions of section 14A: 14A (1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not for part of the total income under this

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.KUNNEL ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS P. LTD, KOCHI

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

section 43B of the Act. Thus, this ground of appeals of the Revenue for both the assessment years is allowed. 5. The next common ground of the Revenue is with regard to disallowance of proportionate interest on borrowed funds. 5.1 The facts of the case are that for the assessment year 2012-13, the Assessing Officer found that there were

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