THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.E.J.SONY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

House, Ernakulam. Ramallur, Kothamangalam. The Assistant Commissioner 8. Shri Jose Mathew, of Income-tax, Circle-1(1), M/s. E.V. Mathai & Sons, Ernakulam. Kothamangalam. Assessee by Shri Mathew Joseph, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30/11/2018 Date of pronouncement 17/01/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These appeals filed by the assessee

SRI.ESSA ISMAIL SAIT,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT,CIR-2(1),, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

House, Ernakulam. Ramallur, Kothamangalam. The Assistant Commissioner 8. Shri Jose Mathew, of Income-tax, Circle-1(1), M/s. E.V. Mathai & Sons, Ernakulam. Kothamangalam. Assessee by Shri Mathew Joseph, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30/11/2018 Date of pronouncement 17/01/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These appeals filed by the assessee

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.MATHAI XAVIER, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

House, Ernakulam. Ramallur, Kothamangalam. The Assistant Commissioner 8. Shri Jose Mathew, of Income-tax, Circle-1(1), M/s. E.V. Mathai & Sons, Ernakulam. Kothamangalam. Assessee by Shri Mathew Joseph, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30/11/2018 Date of pronouncement 17/01/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These appeals filed by the assessee

THE ITO, WARD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.MARTIN JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

House, Ernakulam. Ramallur, Kothamangalam. The Assistant Commissioner 8. Shri Jose Mathew, of Income-tax, Circle-1(1), M/s. E.V. Mathai & Sons, Ernakulam. Kothamangalam. Assessee by Shri Mathew Joseph, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30/11/2018 Date of pronouncement 17/01/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These appeals filed by the assessee

THE ITO, WD-2, THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA vs. SRI.TOMY MATHEW PARTNER OF MATHAI SONS, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

House, Ernakulam. Ramallur, Kothamangalam. The Assistant Commissioner 8. Shri Jose Mathew, of Income-tax, Circle-1(1), M/s. E.V. Mathai & Sons, Ernakulam. Kothamangalam. Assessee by Shri Mathew Joseph, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30/11/2018 Date of pronouncement 17/01/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These appeals filed by the assessee

THEACIT, CIR-1(1),EKM, ERNAKULAM vs. SRI.E.M.JOHNY, KOTHAMANGALAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeals

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

House, Ernakulam. Ramallur, Kothamangalam. The Assistant Commissioner 8. Shri Jose Mathew, of Income-tax, Circle-1(1), M/s. E.V. Mathai & Sons, Ernakulam. Kothamangalam. Assessee by Shri Mathew Joseph, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30/11/2018 Date of pronouncement 17/01/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These appeals filed by the assessee

KUMAR MADHAVANPILLAI.S,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Kumar Madhavanpillai S. Income Tax Officer -1(4) Chandra Press & Book Depot Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar P.O. Manjalikulam Road Thiruvananthapuram 695003 Vs. Thampanoor Thiruvananthapuram 695001 [Pan: Ajxps9299P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

46,720/-only chargeable to tax. 7. Likewise, the AO treated the other three property as short term capital assets and accordingly worked out short term capital gain after deducting WDV from proportionate sales consideration at Rs. 25,75,931/- only. Thus, the AO in view of the above made the addition of Rs. 1,45,22,651/- on account

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

house property; D. Profits and gains of business or profession; E. Capital gains; F. income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

house property; D. Profits and gains of business or profession; E. Capital gains; F. income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

house property; D. Profits and gains of business or profession; E. Capital gains; F. income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

house property; D. Profits and gains of business or profession; E. Capital gains; F. income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under

MRS.REENA JOSE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

house property; D. Profits and gains of business or profession; E. Capital gains; F. income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under

PUTHIRI VINCENT THOMAS ,THODUPUZHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THODUPUZHA

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2010-11 Puthiri Vincent Thomas .......... Appellant Xxiii/249 A, Puthiri House Thodupuzha P.O., Idukki 685584 [Pan: Agwpv7187P] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Thodupuzha .......... Respondent

46,982/-. While doing so, the 2 Puthiri Vincent Thomas AO made addition of Rs.2,39,502/- under the head ‘income from house property’. 3. The factual background leading to the above addition is that the appellant jointly owned a commercial building along with his wife and the same was apportioned to four portions out of which three portions were

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

property and utilisation of that parcel. The question whether the proviso to Section 2(15) would apply is something that has to be decided on the basis of the activity or activities during a particular year which would fall for consideration at the hands of the Assessing Authority. 4. We are of the firm view that the decision rendered

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

property and utilisation of that parcel. The question whether the proviso to Section 2(15) would apply is something that has to be decided on the basis of the activity or activities during a particular year which would fall for consideration at the hands of the Assessing Authority. 4. We are of the firm view that the decision rendered

INFOPARKS KERALA,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JT DIRECTOR OF IT (OSD) EXEM), COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

property’ (IFHP), and cannot be treated as business income. Reliance stood also placed by it on the decisions in Addl.CIT v. Surat Art and Silk Mfrs. Assn. [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC); CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561 (SC); CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat [2014] 364 ITR 31 (SC); and DIT(E) v. Sabarmati Ashram Gaushala Trust

INFOPARKS KERALA,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

property’ (IFHP), and cannot be treated as business income. Reliance stood also placed by it on the decisions in Addl.CIT v. Surat Art and Silk Mfrs. Assn. [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC); CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561 (SC); CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat [2014] 364 ITR 31 (SC); and DIT(E) v. Sabarmati Ashram Gaushala Trust

INFOPARKS KERALA,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JT DIRECTOR OF IT (OSD) EXEM), COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

property’ (IFHP), and cannot be treated as business income. Reliance stood also placed by it on the decisions in Addl.CIT v. Surat Art and Silk Mfrs. Assn. [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC); CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561 (SC); CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat [2014] 364 ITR 31 (SC); and DIT(E) v. Sabarmati Ashram Gaushala Trust