SRI SRAVAN KUMAR NEELA,NALGONDA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the instant appeals by the assesses are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasuma Maheshwara Rao Chinni Asst. Cit, Central Circle -1, Hno. 7-298, 7 Ward Aayakar Bhavan (North Block) Gandhi Bomma Centre Vs. Kozhikode 673001 Dachepalle, Guntur 522414 [Pan:Arjpc0342D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

sections 69, 69A, 69B and 69C of the Act in view of the scheme of those provisions.’ The decision in Kim Pharma Pvt Ltd. (supra), the second decision relied upon by the ld. CIT(A), non-rebuttal of whose order stands noted by us hereinbefore, is to the same effect. In the facts of that case the action

KK RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

disallowed as per the proviso to section 69C.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": ["132", "153A", "69C", "153D", "143(3)"], "issues": "Whether the approval

KERALA SHIPPING AND INLAND NAVIGATION CORPORATION LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Kerala Shipping & Inalnd Dcit, Corporate Circle - 1(1) Navigtation Corporation C.R. Building, I.S. Pres Road 38/924-A, Udaya Nagar Road Kochi 682018 Vs. Gandhi Nagar Kochi 682020 [Pan: Aabck4818L] (Appellant) (Respondent)

69C of the act amounting to Rs.85,60,650/- towards the current year business loss of Rs.1,41,23,290/- instead of the Total Income in the body of the order and need to be corrected. Also, In accordance with the disallowance of the TDS claim that is not due to him as stated in previous para

CHERUVARAKONAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. I.T.O, WARD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance followed by section(s) 68 & 69C addition(s) thereby involving varying sum(s), without dealing 2 ITA No. 579 & SA No. 78/Coch/2024

KK RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

disallowed.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "132", "153A", "69C", "153D", "143(3)" ], "issues": "1. Whether the approval granted by the JCIT under

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

Disallowance of depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

Disallowance of depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

Disallowance of depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made

INNOVATE DESIGNERS&BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,WARD 1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2022-23 Innovate Designers & Builders Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant Tc 93/1944 Krishna Flat, Kra 11A Railway Station Road, Pallikuku, Pettah Thiruvananthapuram 695024 [Pan: Aaeci2784C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1) .......... Respondent Thiruvananthapuram Appellant By: Shri Mathew Joseph, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 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 Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Kochi, Dated 25.09.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Undertaking Civil Contracts & 2 Innovate Designers & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Constructions. The Return Of Income For Ay 2022-23 Was Filed On 26.09.2022 Declaring Nil Income. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By Ito, Ward-1(1), Thiruvananthapuram (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 21.03.2024 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) At A Total Income Of Rs. 6,12,03,924/- By Holding That The Appellant Could Not Furnish Evidence In Support Of The Expenditure Incurred On Commission, Etc. & Treated The Same As Unexplained Expenditure U/S. 69C Of The Act.

69C of the Act. 3. On appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) confirmed the addition u/s. 37 of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that even in exparte assessment high pitched assessment cannot be made by disallowance of expenditure