V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

131 (Ker), would survive only where incriminating material had been found during search, initiated by issue of warrant on 22/9/2014, which led to the assumption of jurisdiction to assess and issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian

V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

131 (Ker), would survive only where incriminating material had been found during search, initiated by issue of warrant on 22/9/2014, which led to the assumption of jurisdiction to assess and issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian

CHENGAZHASSERIL THOMAS KURIAN,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

131 (Ker), would survive only where incriminating material had been found during search, initiated by issue of warrant on 22/9/2014, which led to the assumption of jurisdiction to assess and issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian

V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

131 (Ker), would survive only where incriminating material had been found during search, initiated by issue of warrant on 22/9/2014, which led to the assumption of jurisdiction to assess and issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian

V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

131 (Ker), would survive only where incriminating material had been found during search, initiated by issue of warrant on 22/9/2014, which led to the assumption of jurisdiction to assess and issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian

CHENGAZHASSERIL THOMAS KURIAN,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

131 (Ker), would survive only where incriminating material had been found during search, initiated by issue of warrant on 22/9/2014, which led to the assumption of jurisdiction to assess and issue of notice u/s. 153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian

SHEEJAMOL SAINABABEEVI ALIYARUKUNJU,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petition is dismissed as infrutuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

131 to the said individuals. To said summons three individual viz Ms. Rajila, Mr Abdul Rasheed and Mr Santhoshkumar appeared before the officer had given their statement. Though the copy of the statements were not furnished to the appellant, it was brought to her notice that they had agreed they given the amount to the appellant. The assessing officer, discarding

SRI UMA MAHESHWARA RAO CHINNI,GUNTUR vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,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)

house property, business or profession, and capital gains. It does not mean, as being understood by the assessee, that the source need not be specified or, in any case, the same is itself a source! How ITA No. 895, 899/Coch/2022 (AY : 2017-18) Uma Maheshwara Rao Chinni & Anr. v. Asst. CIT could that be? That would be putting the cart

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)

house property, business or profession, and capital gains. It does not mean, as being understood by the assessee, that the source need not be specified or, in any case, the same is itself a source! How ITA No. 895, 899/Coch/2022 (AY : 2017-18) Uma Maheshwara Rao Chinni & Anr. v. Asst. CIT could that be? That would be putting the cart

SINI NOUSHAD,THRISSUR vs. THE ITO, WARD 1(3), THRISSUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Sa No. 144/Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sini Noushad The Income Tax Officer Poovathumkiadavil House Ward - 1(3), Thrissur Kara Post, Peethamaballur Vs. Kathiyalam, Thrissur 608671 [Pan: Emrps6227J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 27.12.2019 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department [CIT(A)], vide his order dated 15.02.2023. The assessee has qua the instant appeal also filed a stay application. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee

KERALA INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUTURE DEV CORPORATION(KINFRA),TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

House, 31/2312, Sasthamangalam Trivandrum – 695 010. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sri.Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate Revenue by : Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 Date of Hearing : 14.08.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : This assessee’s appeal ITA No.452/Coch/2014 for assessment year 2009-2010 arises against CIT, Thiruvananthapuram’s order No.C.No.412/J/R-21/2013-14 dated 18.03.2014, in proceedings u/s.263

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION), TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEV.CORPORATION, TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

House, 31/2312, Sasthamangalam Trivandrum – 695 010. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sri.Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate Revenue by : Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 Date of Hearing : 14.08.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : This assessee’s appeal ITA No.452/Coch/2014 for assessment year 2009-2010 arises against CIT, Thiruvananthapuram’s order No.C.No.412/J/R-21/2013-14 dated 18.03.2014, in proceedings u/s.263

THE DCIT,CEN-CIRCLE,, THRISSUR vs. SRI.T.G. CHANDRAKUMAR, THRISSUR

In the result, the Appeal by the Revenue is allowed on the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora (Accountant Member), Shri Sandeep Gosain (Judicial Member)

section (3) thereof, would have no bearing on the merits of the case. The decision by the first appellate authority for that year, as for the current year, cannot bind this Tribunal, so that the matter cannot be regarded as covered, and would require being adjudicated by it on merits. The same would though be relevant and taken into account

SRI. E.NOUSHAD,KOLLAM vs. DCIT, KOLLAN

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the stay petitions dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

house (at Rs.3.08 lakhs); (b) source of deposit in bank account with Federal Bank, Thodiyoor Branch (at Rs.3.30 lakhs);and (c) source of purchase of property admitted in net wealth (Rs.3.18 lakhs), made during the year, i.e., aggregating to Rs.9.56 lakhs. There is no reference, he pointed out, to material seized during search in the assessment order. Like-wise

SRI.E.NOUSHAD,KOLLAM vs. THE DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the stay petitions dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

house (at Rs.3.08 lakhs); (b) source of deposit in bank account with Federal Bank, Thodiyoor Branch (at Rs.3.30 lakhs);and (c) source of purchase of property admitted in net wealth (Rs.3.18 lakhs), made during the year, i.e., aggregating to Rs.9.56 lakhs. There is no reference, he pointed out, to material seized during search in the assessment order. Like-wise

SRI.E. NOUSHAD,KOLLAM vs. DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the stay petitions dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

house (at Rs.3.08 lakhs); (b) source of deposit in bank account with Federal Bank, Thodiyoor Branch (at Rs.3.30 lakhs);and (c) source of purchase of property admitted in net wealth (Rs.3.18 lakhs), made during the year, i.e., aggregating to Rs.9.56 lakhs. There is no reference, he pointed out, to material seized during search in the assessment order. Like-wise

SANATANA DHARMA EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL SOCIETY,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

131 ITR 597 (SC) has observed as under regarding use of Speech of a Minister as a tool in interpretation : Quote , “ Now it is true that the speeches made by the Members of the Legislature on the floor of the House when a Bill for enacting a statutory provision is being debated are inadmissible for the purpose of interpreting

SANATANA DHARMA VIDYASALA,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

131 ITR 597 (SC) has observed as under regarding use of Speech of a Minister as a tool in interpretation : Quote , “ Now it is true that the speeches made by the Members of the Legislature on the floor of the House when a Bill for enacting a statutory provision is being debated are inadmissible for the purpose of interpreting

RUCHIT PARIMAL ASHAR,SANALA ROAD, MORBI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

house of Shri Rajendran, are now unavailable and the learned counsel for the Revenue has no answer for the same. On these premise, the assessment order made for the Assessment years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 requires to be quashed. 13.2 The above finding of the Hon’ble High Court was affirmed