YOONUS KADAVATH PEEDIKAYIL,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 1 & TPS, KANNUR

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasyoonus Kadavath Peedikayil The Income Tax Officer M/S. Modern Enterprises Ward – 1 & Tps Kakkad Road Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Kannur 670005 Kannothumchal [Pan:Ccwpk6415P] Chovva P.O., Kannur 670006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri R. Krishnan, Ca Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R.

section 274 of granting reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, it explained, could not be stretched to the extent of framing a specific charge. As explained earlier in CIT v. Manu Engineering Works[1980] 122 ITR 306 (Guj), the use of the words ‘and/or’, i.e., between the two charges, being ‘concealment of particulars of income’ and ‘furnishing inaccurate

INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY P.O vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), ERNAKULAM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

10 cases where cash repayments aremade, one person is a trustee of the appellant Trust ( Mr K P Shaji) , 4 cases are former employees locally available, from whom notarized affidavits are taken, 2 persons are in abroad from them emails are received and KYC details available, 2 persons passed away and one person is not available for contact). This

INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY, KOTHAMANGALAM vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), ERNAKULAM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

10 cases where cash repayments aremade, one person is a trustee of the appellant Trust ( Mr K P Shaji) , 4 cases are former employees locally available, from whom notarized affidavits are taken, 2 persons are in abroad from them emails are received and KYC details available, 2 persons passed away and one person is not available for contact). This

CHUNDAYIL KALAM GIRIJADEVI ,KERALASSERY vs. ITO WARD 1 & TPS, PALAKKAD

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

271(1)(c) of the Act, even if the claim made by him is unsustainable in law provided that he either substantiates the explanation offered by him or the explanation, even if not substantiated, is found to be bona fide. E. Where the appellant has withdrawn the claim during the course of the assessment proceedings, the penalty under section 270A

SHRI.PRAKASH R. NAIR,KOLLAM vs. DCIT, KOLLAM

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasprakash R. Nair Dy.Cit, Central Circle Prop. Dhanya Foods Kollam Kochuppilammoodu Vs. Kollam 691001 [Pan:Abfpn4424P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

271(1)(c) of the Act vide notice u/s. 274 of even date: 2 Prakash R. Nair v. Dy.CIT, Central Circle i. Claim for deduction u/s 80IA(Rs.68,82,867/-) was rejected. ii. Bank interest of Rs. 3,13,508/- was assessed as ‘Income from Other Sources’. iii. The claim for deduction u/s 80HHC was restricted with reference to section

THE KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD ,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE ITO, WD-1(2),, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

20,000 aggregating and otherwise at any point of time, as given above, penalty provisions of section 271D and section 271E of the Income-tax Act are attracted. Accordingly, initiated penalty proceedings under section 271D and section 271E." This was followed by notice u/s. 274 of the Act by the Jt. CIT, show causing the assessee in the matter

M/S.KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE ITO, WD-1(2), KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

20,000 aggregating and otherwise at any point of time, as given above, penalty provisions of section 271D and section 271E of the Income-tax Act are attracted. Accordingly, initiated penalty proceedings under section 271D and section 271E." This was followed by notice u/s. 274 of the Act by the Jt. CIT, show causing the assessee in the matter

SRI.MOHAMMED SHERIEF,KARUNAGAPPALLY vs. THE DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, ITA No. 463/Coch/2016 is allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

20,952/-. 12. Accordingly the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed. 13. The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kochi dated 22.07.2022 for AY 2007-08 confirming the levy of penalty. 14. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual. The return

SRI.MOHAMMED SHERIEF,KARUNAGAPPALLY vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, ITA No. 463/Coch/2016 is allowed and ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

20,952/-. 12. Accordingly the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed. 13. The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kochi dated 22.07.2022 for AY 2007-08 confirming the levy of penalty. 14. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual. The return