THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

3 nos. of notices u/s 142(1) of the Act as well as a show cause noticedated 19/02/2022. The AO after considering the reply of the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings held that the assessee had failed to prove the source of credits in its bank account. Further the AO was of the view that the assessee

KUNDOLY KRISHNANKUTTY SUNIL,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

house warming expenses.\"\n7.2.\nThe above findings returned by Assessing Officer in respect of\nexpenses of INR.14,61,117/- are concerned, the same have gone\nuncontroverted during the appellate proceedings and there is no\nmaterial on record to persuade us to take a different view of the\nmatter. As regards balance expenses are concerned we are of the\nview that

PANICHIKANDY MOHANDASAN,KASARGOD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

section 40A(3) of the Act. While making the disallowance the AO observed that genuineness of transaction is not sufficient. The AO also disallowed the claim of depreciation on Multiplex and shopping Mall by holding that construction is not complete. Similarly the AO also disallowed interest on of Rs. 7,88,919/- availed from KFC for construction of Multiplex

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

3 ITA Nos.75-77/Coch/2015 (AYs. 2009-10 to 11-12) Infopark Kerala v. Jt.DIT (infra), wherein it explains that in view of the paradigm change in sec. 2(15) after its amendment w.e.f. AY 2009-10, a charity engaged in advancement of an object of general public utility cannot engage in any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business

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

3 ITA Nos.75-77/Coch/2015 (AYs. 2009-10 to 11-12) Infopark Kerala v. Jt.DIT (infra), wherein it explains that in view of the paradigm change in sec. 2(15) after its amendment w.e.f. AY 2009-10, a charity engaged in advancement of an object of general public utility cannot engage in any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business

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

3 ITA Nos.75-77/Coch/2015 (AYs. 2009-10 to 11-12) Infopark Kerala v. Jt.DIT (infra), wherein it explains that in view of the paradigm change in sec. 2(15) after its amendment w.e.f. AY 2009-10, a charity engaged in advancement of an object of general public utility cannot engage in any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

housing society; property chargeable under section 22. (2) An urban consumer society; (3) A society carrying on transport business; (4) A society engaged in the performance of any manufacturing operations with the aid of power, where the gross total income does not exceed Rs. 20,000 (twenty thousand rupees) 29. From the Tabular form presented above, it may be clear

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

housing society; property chargeable under section 22. (2) An urban consumer society; (3) A society carrying on transport business; (4) A society engaged in the performance of any manufacturing operations with the aid of power, where the gross total income does not exceed Rs. 20,000 (twenty thousand rupees) 29. From the Tabular form presented above, it may be clear

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

housing society; property chargeable under section 22. (2) An urban consumer society; (3) A society carrying on transport business; (4) A society engaged in the performance of any manufacturing operations with the aid of power, where the gross total income does not exceed Rs. 20,000 (twenty thousand rupees) 29. From the Tabular form presented above, it may be clear

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

GOOD HOMES PVT LTD,KOCHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) dated 18.3.2015 and 29.3.2014 for assessment year (AY) 2007-2008, respectively. The background facts of both the cases being same, these are heard together, and are being disposed of pera common, consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA Nos.870& 884 /Coch/2022 (AY 2007-08) Ajit

AJIT ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. JCIT, CORPORATE RANGE - 1, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) dated 18.3.2015 and 29.3.2014 for assessment year (AY) 2007-2008, respectively. The background facts of both the cases being same, these are heard together, and are being disposed of pera common, consolidated order for the sake of convenience. ITA Nos.870& 884 /Coch/2022 (AY 2007-08) Ajit

MR. PREM MUKUNDAN ,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD-2(2), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. (Judicial Member), Ms. Padmavathy S. (Accountant Member)

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: - The assessee is a senior citizen aged 70 years. For AY 2011-12 return of income was filed on 11.07.2011 declaring total income of Rs.18,55,120/- from pension, house property and interest. In the said return of income the assessee had declared interest income of his deceased wife from

P. K JAYAPRAKASAN,VALAPPAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD 1, GURUVAYUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16 Panakkal Kumaran Jayaprakasan Panakkal House Valappad Beach Valapad Cit(A) Vs. Thrissur 680 567 Thrissur Kerala Pan No : Afrpj2700A Appellant Respondent Appellant By : N O N E Respondent By : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr. Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 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 Cit(A), Thrissur Dated 12.08.2020 For The Ay 2015- 16 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Mr. P.K. Jayaprakasan, Thrissur Page 2 Of 5 Mr. P.K. Jayaprakasan, Thrissur Page 3 Of 5

House Valappad Beach Valapad CIT(A) Vs. Thrissur 680 567 Thrissur Kerala PAN NO : AFRPJ2700A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR. Date of Hearing : 19.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.04.2025 O R D E R PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

70,390 2016-17 02.08.2018 61,100 2017-18 19.10.2018 2,62,690 4. There was a search u/s. 132 of the IT Act (“the Act”) was carried out in the case of Shri Vinodkumar Kuttappan group on 05.05.2016 and the assessee is wife of Shri Vinod Kumar Kuttappan. The assessee is the Managing Director of Keranadu Printing and Publishing

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

70,390 2016-17 02.08.2018 61,100 2017-18 19.10.2018 2,62,690 4. There was a search u/s. 132 of the IT Act (“the Act”) was carried out in the case of Shri Vinodkumar Kuttappan group on 05.05.2016 and the assessee is wife of Shri Vinod Kumar Kuttappan. The assessee is the Managing Director of Keranadu Printing and Publishing

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

70,390 2016-17 02.08.2018 61,100 2017-18 19.10.2018 2,62,690 4. There was a search u/s. 132 of the IT Act (“the Act”) was carried out in the case of Shri Vinodkumar Kuttappan group on 05.05.2016 and the assessee is wife of Shri Vinod Kumar Kuttappan. The assessee is the Managing Director of Keranadu Printing and Publishing

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

70,390 2016-17 02.08.2018 61,100 2017-18 19.10.2018 2,62,690 4. There was a search u/s. 132 of the IT Act (“the Act”) was carried out in the case of Shri Vinodkumar Kuttappan group on 05.05.2016 and the assessee is wife of Shri Vinod Kumar Kuttappan. The assessee is the Managing Director of Keranadu Printing and Publishing