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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance claim qua its golf course under the head “plant and machinery”. Learned A.R. not only drew strong support from the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion but also produced this tribunal’s coordinate bench’s order in Landbase India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 185 ITD 40 (Delhi) (Tribu.). Mr. Gopi takes as to para 6 therein that

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

disallowance claim qua its golf course under the head “plant and machinery”. Learned A.R. not only drew strong support from the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion but also produced this tribunal’s coordinate bench’s order in Landbase India Ltd. vs. ACIT [2020] 185 ITD 40 (Delhi) (Tribu.). Mr. Gopi takes as to para 6 therein that

VAM GROUP HI-TECH ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Vam Group Hi-Tech Engineering Dcit, Circle - 1 Pvt. Ltd. Alappuzha X/685, Vam House, Vs. Pathirappally P.O., Alappuzha 688521 [Pan: Aaacv6606N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

90,000/-, the disallowance ultimately directed works out to nearly 110% of that sum, i.e., Rs. 52,56,197/-. By no stretch of imagination can 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.

section 14A mandates to make disallowance of the expenses claimed by the assessee in relation to the exempted income. However, such disallowance can be worked out after recording satisfaction after having regard to the accounts of the assessee. In the present case the assessee is engaged in consultancy services and has declared a total income

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.

section 14A mandates to make disallowance of the expenses claimed by the assessee in relation to the exempted income. However, such disallowance can be worked out after recording satisfaction after having regard to the accounts of the assessee. In the present case the assessee is engaged in consultancy services and has declared a total income

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.

section 14A mandates to make disallowance of the expenses claimed by the assessee in relation to the exempted income. However, such disallowance can be worked out after recording satisfaction after having regard to the accounts of the assessee. In the present case the assessee is engaged in consultancy services and has declared a total income

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

section 80P of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2007. SP. Nos. 90 to 92/Coch/2022 A.Ys. 2013-14 to AY. 2015-16 M/s. Edavannakkad Service Co-op. Hence, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who took note of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

section 80P of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2007. SP. Nos. 90 to 92/Coch/2022 A.Ys. 2013-14 to AY. 2015-16 M/s. Edavannakkad Service Co-op. Hence, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who took note of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

M/S EDAVANAKKAD SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 1,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(5) NON CORPORATE, KOCHI

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

section 80P of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2007. SP. Nos. 90 to 92/Coch/2022 A.Ys. 2013-14 to AY. 2015-16 M/s. Edavannakkad Service Co-op. Hence, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who took note of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

M/S.STATE BANK OF INDIA(SUCCESSOR TO STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE),TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section and hence no disallowance is warranted. 3. Your appellant craves leave to add to amend and or vary the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 7. We now advert to sec.36(1)(viia) deduction disallowance /addition amounting to Rs.10,90

M/S.STATE BANK OF INDIA(SUCCESSOR TO STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE),TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

section and hence no disallowance is warranted. 3. Your appellant craves leave to add to amend and or vary the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 7. We now advert to sec.36(1)(viia) deduction disallowance /addition amounting to Rs.10,90

SUD CHEMIE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,ALUVA vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

section 14A is only to the extent of disallowing expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to the exempt income. This proportion or portion of the tax exempt income surely cannot swallow the entire amount. In this case, admittedly, the assessee has earned dividend income of Rs.4,000 from investment in shares of Canara Bank, whereas the A.O. has determined

REJI KRISHNAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K

90,140. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) were issued, for which the assessee filed detailed written submissions along with documents. The Assessing Officer (AO) after considering 2 Sri.Reji Krishnan. the reply and the documents had disallowed the claim made u/s 54F of the Act in respect of the investment made

THUDANGANAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THUDANGANAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, THODUPUZHA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhthudanganad Service Co-Op. The Income Tax Officer Bank Ltd. Ward - 1. Thodupuzha Thudanganad P.O., Muttam Vs. Thudanganad 685587 [Pan: Aacat5997N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowed the assessee’s section 80P(2)(a)(i) and section 80P(2)(d) income(s) or Rs.61,90,159/- and Rs.6

MR.P.C.JOSE,,COCHIN vs. DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasp.C. Jose Deputy Commissioner Of Prop. Brothers Agencies Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Jews Street Vs. Kochi Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of P.C. Jose Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Prop. Brothers Agencies Kochi Vs. Jews Street Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 29.12.2010 for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. ITA Nos. 54& 84/Coch/2012 (AY: 2008-09) P.C. Jose v. Dy CIT / Dy. CIT v. P.C. Jose Ex-parte Order 2. The appeals were heard at length on 10.08.2023, covering all the issues, including the principal one, being the assessment

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 Cheruvarakonam Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. with the relevant factual matrix as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act requiring him to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon. We further note that

FEDBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2017-18

disallowed the claim of provisions on standard assets and confined its provisions only to an extent of bad and doubtful debts on the Page 6 of 9 non-performing assets. Hence there is no error in the assessment order passed by the assessing authority. 6. Section 263 is to be invoked when the twin conditions of order being erroneous

THE VELIYANAD CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO 29,VELIYANAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 2(1), KOCHI, ERNAKULAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2020-21 Veliyanad Co-Operative Society Ltd. .......... Appellant 14A, Arakunnam Veliyanad B.O. Edakkattuavyal, Ernakulam 682303 [Pan: Aacat9073F] Vs. Ito, Corporate Ward (2(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Amaljith P.J., Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.11.2025

90,47,390/-. While doing so, the AO had denied deduction u/s. 80P of the Act on the ground that no return of income was filed within the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act, placing reliance on provisions of section 80AC of the Act. Further, the AO made disallowance