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

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

section 90(2) of the Act. 7.6 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ACIT and DRP have erred in law by confirming the disallowance

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

section 90(2) of the Act. 7.6 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ACIT and DRP have erred in law by confirming the disallowance

M/S.KERALA STATE CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEV BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

disallowing the deduction claimed by the Appellant under section 80P(2)(a)(i) amounting to Rs.81,55,90,334 and restricting

M/S.KERALA STATE CO-OP AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEV BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

disallowing the deduction claimed by the Appellant under section 80P(2)(a)(i) amounting to Rs.81,55,90,334 and restricting

M/S. MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS(INDIA) P.LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

90,000 under section 36(1 )(iii) is not correct. Moreover , the assessment for the earlier years were completed under section 143(3), of which two years was done by the same AO accepting the appellant's argument of commercial expediency and the disallowance

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

Section 37 of the Act, which was disallowed. In the case of the appellant, the AIT dues were paid from the Agricultural income derived from the rubber estate, and therefore, out of funds/revenue generated from the business and not from any borrowed funds. The source of funds and the nature of payment strike the differential note in the case

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

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

Section 37 of the Act, which was disallowed. In the case of the appellant, the AIT dues were paid from the Agricultural income derived from the rubber estate, and therefore, out of funds/revenue generated from the business and not from any borrowed funds. The source of funds and the nature of payment strike the differential note in the case

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

Section 37 of the Act, which was disallowed. In the case of the appellant, the AIT dues were paid from the Agricultural income derived from the rubber estate, and therefore, out of funds/revenue generated from the business and not from any borrowed funds. The source of funds and the nature of payment strike the differential note in the case

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

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

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

Section 37 of the Act, which was disallowed. In the case of the appellant, the AIT dues were paid from the Agricultural income derived from the rubber estate, and therefore, out of funds/revenue generated from the business and not from any borrowed funds. The source of funds and the nature of payment strike the differential note in the case

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 an amount of Rs.67,30,90,917/- by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. I.T.A

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

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application

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

disallowance of interest expenditure made by the Assessing Officer on public deposits amounting to I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 Rs. 7,45,07,387/- under explanation to section 37(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The CIT(A) has elaborately observed as follows: “4. Appreciation of facts and Application