TRIVANDRUM CABLE NETWORK (P) LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

disallowances:- (i) Addition of undisclosed advertisement & slot income. Rs.5,22,344 (ii) Addition on account of unexplained cash credit Rs.8

TRIVANDRUM CABLE NETWORK (P) LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

disallowances:- (i) Addition of undisclosed advertisement & slot income. Rs.5,22,344 (ii) Addition on account of unexplained cash credit Rs.8

TRIVANDRUM CABLE NETWORK (P) LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

disallowances:- (i) Addition of undisclosed advertisement & slot income. Rs.5,22,344 (ii) Addition on account of unexplained cash credit Rs.8

TRIVANDRUM CABLE NETWORK (P) LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

disallowances:- (i) Addition of undisclosed advertisement & slot income. Rs.5,22,344 (ii) Addition on account of unexplained cash credit Rs.8

RAFEEK,KERALA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S. & Sa.No.58/Coch/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.861/Coch/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rafeek Vs Ito, Ward-3 Kochukaleeckal A.N.Puram Krishnapuram Alappuzha Kappilmekku Kerala-688 011 Alappuzha-690 533 Pan – Akjpr2342F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri Suresh Varma, Ca Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 02.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 .03.2023 O R D E R Per: George George K., J.M. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 13.09.2021. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2017-18. The Assessee Also Filed A Stay Application Seeking To Stay The Recovery Of Outstanding Tax Arrears.

disallowed u/s. 69 and u/s. 68 of the I.T.Act, 1961 as unexplained investment and unexplained cash credit respectively as per the assessment

NAVDEEP EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KOLLAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, KOLLAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17 Navdeep Educational Trust 38/109, Navdeep Mundakkal East 691001 Acit Vs. Kollam Circle Kerala Kollam Pan No : Aabtn0952H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Surendranath Rao, A.R. Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.04.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)/ Nfac Dated 26.02.2024 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1061508122(1) For The Ay 2016-17 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Navdeep Educational Trust, Kollam Page 2 Of 6

disallowed Travelling expenses of Managing 3,33,606 trustee to UK Protective addition made u/s 68 for alleged unexplained cash 1,54,45,000/- credit

SASI CHELLAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(2), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. We have considered the submission made by the Ld.AR that the assessee is having all the details of the relatives from whom she had received the gifts and if one more opportunity is granted, the assessee would furnish all the details before the Ld.CIT(A) in support of his claim that

SRI.S.BASKAR SAIT,TRICHUR vs. THE DCIT, TRICHUR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

Unexplained credits in 2,48,250 banks Addition towards capital 2,35,378 3,34,504 gain 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) for AY 2002-03 gave partial relief with regard to the loan credits not proved for an amount of Rs.13,30,000. With regard to other disallowances

SRI.S.BASKAR SAIT,TRICHUR vs. THE DCIT, TRICHUR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

Unexplained credits in 2,48,250 banks Addition towards capital 2,35,378 3,34,504 gain 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) for AY 2002-03 gave partial relief with regard to the loan credits not proved for an amount of Rs.13,30,000. With regard to other disallowances

THE TRIVANDRUM EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO. 43,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ADDITIONAL JOINT DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

cash credits u/s 68 of the Act The penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC 3f the Act is warranted in the case of assessee in addition to the tax payable under section 1 15BBE of the Act as the total income of the assessee includes income u/s 68 of the Act." 7.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has contended the above

THE TRIVANDRUM EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED NO. 43,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

cash credits u/s 68 of the Act The penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC 3f the Act is warranted in the case of assessee in addition to the tax payable under section 1 15BBE of the Act as the total income of the assessee includes income u/s 68 of the Act." 7.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has contended the above

THRIUVANNATHAPURAM JILLA DEPOSIT COLLECTION AGENTS CO-OP SOCIETY,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO WARD 2(1), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhasst.Year 2017-18 Thiruvannathapuram Jilla Ito, Deposit Collection Agents V. Ward-2(1), Trivendrum Cooperative Society, Central Theater Road, Attara Building, Pazhavangadi, Thiruvananthapuram-695036 Kerala Pan : Aafat0403J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Sanjit Kumar Date Of Pronouncement : 05.11. 2024 Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : This Assessee’S Appeal In Ita No.417/Coch/2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) / Nfac Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1051459380(1) Dated 28.03.2023, In Proceedings U/S.250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act” Hereinafter. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. It Is Accordingly Proceed Exparte.

disallowance, unexplained cash credits addition u/s.68 of Rs.2,87,14,321/-, section 69 unexplained investment addition of Rs.12,73,96,293/- and rejected

VETTUVANTHODI ABDUL AZEEZ,KOZHIKODE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), KOZHIKODE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

unexplained cash credit introduced by the assessee to the tune of Rs.34,49,929 except the sum of Rs.8 lakhs received from his wife. It was submitted by the learned AR that the money was withdrawn by the wife of the assessee in cash, which was introduced as capital contribution by the assessee. The learned AR in support

RAJU JOSEPH VAYALAT,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, WARD-2(5), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The AO further observed that the assessee had sold land for Rs. 44,39,000 and claimed cost of improvement of Rs. 35,77,949 while computing capital gains. Since no supporting evidence for the cost of improvement was produced, the AO rejected the claim and computed the long-term capital gain

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason