THE ACIT, CORP CIRCLE-1(2), KOCHI vs. M/S.KNOWELL REALTORS INDIA P. LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

1(2), Knowell Jairaj Building Kochi. NH Byepass, Near Edappally Junction Kochi – 682 024. [PAN: AABCM 6039M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Sri. Santosh P. Abraham, Adv. Respondent by: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR Date of Date of Hearing : 13.07.2023 Pronouncement: 25.09.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: These are two Appeals by the Revenue agitating the appellate order dated

THE ACIT, CORP CIRCLE-1(2), KOCHI vs. M/S.KNOWELL REALTORS INDIA P. LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

1(2), Knowell Jairaj Building Kochi. NH Byepass, Near Edappally Junction Kochi – 682 024. [PAN: AABCM 6039M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Sri. Santosh P. Abraham, Adv. Respondent by: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR Date of Date of Hearing : 13.07.2023 Pronouncement: 25.09.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: These are two Appeals by the Revenue agitating the appellate order dated

SMT. MARIES JOSEPH,THRISSUR vs. DCIT, INT. TAXATION, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeal in ITA No

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

9 of 14 assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) took into account the residential property owned by the assessee in USA and denied the entire benefit under section 54F of the Act by stating that the assessee is hit by the proviso (i) to section 54F of the Act. Before proceeding further we will look

SMT. MARIES JOSEPH,THRISSUR vs. DCIT, INT. TAXATION, KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeal in ITA No

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

9 of 14 assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) took into account the residential property owned by the assessee in USA and denied the entire benefit under section 54F of the Act by stating that the assessee is hit by the proviso (i) to section 54F of the Act. Before proceeding further we will look

K P MUHAMMED ALI,CALICUT vs. ITO ( INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), KOZHIKODE

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Manomohan Dask.P. Muhammed Ali Income Tax Officer K.P. House: 19/1866 (International Taxation) Chalappuram Vs. Kozhikode Calicut 673002 [Pan:Agnpm9397F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

House: 19/1866 (International Taxation) Chalappuram Vs. Kozhikode Calicut 673002 [PAN:AGNPM9397F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Raghunathan Palakkal, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 16.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 12.01.2024 O R D E R Per: Sanjay Arora, AM This is an Appeal by the Assessee arising out of order dated 25.11.2022 by the Commissioner

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)

house property and interest. In the said return of income the assessee had declared interest income of his deceased wife from SBI and Canara Bank and claimed TDS credit on the same. Intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was issued on 13.02.2013, disallowing TDS credit in the name of assessee’s wife. 4. Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before

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

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.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

LAST HOUR MINISTRY,THIRUVALLA vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

V 11/37, Poothicote, Manjadi – Jn P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATL 4778 J] 3. Ayana Charitable Trust, 303/Thengumtharayil, Kuttapuzha P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATG 0907 G] 4. Believers Eastern Church, Thomas Nagar, Kuttappuzha P.O. Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATB 4723 D] vs. Commissioner of Income Tax .......... Respondent (Exemption) Kochi. 2 ITA No. 12-15/Coch/2021 Last Hour Ministry & Ors. Appellant by: Shri

AYANA CHARITABLE TRUST,THIRUVALLA vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

V 11/37, Poothicote, Manjadi – Jn P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATL 4778 J] 3. Ayana Charitable Trust, 303/Thengumtharayil, Kuttapuzha P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATG 0907 G] 4. Believers Eastern Church, Thomas Nagar, Kuttappuzha P.O. Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATB 4723 D] vs. Commissioner of Income Tax .......... Respondent (Exemption) Kochi. 2 ITA No. 12-15/Coch/2021 Last Hour Ministry & Ors. Appellant by: Shri

M/S.BELIEVERS EASTERN CHURCH,THIRUVALLA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

V 11/37, Poothicote, Manjadi – Jn P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATL 4778 J] 3. Ayana Charitable Trust, 303/Thengumtharayil, Kuttapuzha P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATG 0907 G] 4. Believers Eastern Church, Thomas Nagar, Kuttappuzha P.O. Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATB 4723 D] vs. Commissioner of Income Tax .......... Respondent (Exemption) Kochi. 2 ITA No. 12-15/Coch/2021 Last Hour Ministry & Ors. Appellant by: Shri

LOVE INDIA MINISTRIES,THIRUVALLA vs. THE DCIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stand allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

V 11/37, Poothicote, Manjadi – Jn P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATL 4778 J] 3. Ayana Charitable Trust, 303/Thengumtharayil, Kuttapuzha P.O., Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATG 0907 G] 4. Believers Eastern Church, Thomas Nagar, Kuttappuzha P.O. Thiruvalla, Kerala [PAN : AAATB 4723 D] vs. Commissioner of Income Tax .......... Respondent (Exemption) Kochi. 2 ITA No. 12-15/Coch/2021 Last Hour Ministry & Ors. Appellant by: Shri

REJI KRISHNAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K

v) The Learned AO/CIT(A) has incorrectly disallowed 54F on the ground that each individual sale of land is not eligible for Section 54F and all sales can be reinvested only 1 House Property, which is totally opposed to the established law. (vi) Further the case laws relied upon by the AO/CIT(A) are completely different from theAppellant's case

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Housing Society and NDMC (supra). B.2. However, at the same time, in every case, the assessing authorities would have to apply their minds and scrutinize the records, to determine if, and to what extent, the consideration or amounts charged are significantly higher than the cost and a nominal mark-up. If such is the case, then the receipts would indicate

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Housing Society and NDMC (supra). B.2. However, at the same time, in every case, the assessing authorities would have to apply their minds and scrutinize the records, to determine if, and to what extent, the consideration or amounts charged are significantly higher than the cost and a nominal mark-up. If such is the case, then the receipts would indicate

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

9 of 19 (6) It must be grasped that the judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so. 3.5 When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred