SRI.THOMAS CHACKO PROPRIETOR OF GROUP MUKKADAN,KCOHI vs. ACIT , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80JJAA deduction(s) involving varying sums disallowed by the Assessing Officer, as upheld in the lower appellate discussion, as under: - “4.3 In the present case, it is an undisputed fact that the appellant furnished his return of income on 30.12.2020 against the extended due date of 15.02.2021 with gross total income at Rs. 2,31,31,119/- and claimed

SRI.THOMAS CHACKO PROPRIETOR OF GROUP MUKKADAN,KCOHI vs. ACIT WARD-2, KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80JJAA deduction(s) involving varying sums disallowed by the Assessing Officer, as upheld in the lower appellate discussion, as under: - “4.3 In the present case, it is an undisputed fact that the appellant furnished his return of income on 30.12.2020 against the extended due date of 15.02.2021 with gross total income at Rs. 2,31,31,119/- and claimed

THOMAS CHACKO,KOCHI vs. THE DCIT KOCHI CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section 80JJAA deduction(s) involving varying sums disallowed by the Assessing Officer, as upheld in the lower appellate discussion, as under: - “4.3 In the present case, it is an undisputed fact that the appellant furnished his return of income on 30.12.2020 against the extended due date of 15.02.2021 with gross total income at Rs. 2,31,31,119/- and claimed

PULPATTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ITO WARD-2, TIRUR, TIRUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

80C to 80U. (2) …(4) (5) Where the assessee fails to make a claim in his return of income for any deduction under section 10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or under any provision of this Chapter under the heading "C.—Deductions in respect of certain incomes", no deduction shall be allowed to him thereunder

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance is made. The Ld.AR in this regard relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals reported in [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) where it is held that If no incriminating material was found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance is made. The Ld.AR in this regard relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals reported in [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) where it is held that If no incriminating material was found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance is made. The Ld.AR in this regard relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals reported in [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) where it is held that If no incriminating material was found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance is made. The Ld.AR in this regard relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals reported in [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) where it is held that If no incriminating material was found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance is made. The Ld.AR in this regard relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals reported in [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) where it is held that If no incriminating material was found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance is made. The Ld.AR in this regard relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals reported in [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) where it is held that If no incriminating material was found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

disallowance is made. The Ld.AR in this regard relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr.CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals reported in [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) where it is held that If no incriminating material was found during the course of search in respect of an issue, then no additions