SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A is invalid. Immediately, the ld. DR Shri M. Anil Kumar produced the assessment folder for verification of the ld. Representative for the assessee and submitted that search was conducted in the case of Smt. Asha Sunil and search warrant was also issued in her name. After verifying the files

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A is invalid. Immediately, the ld. DR Shri M. Anil Kumar produced the assessment folder for verification of the ld. Representative for the assessee and submitted that search was conducted in the case of Smt. Asha Sunil and search warrant was also issued in her name. After verifying the files

SMT.ASHA MENON( ASHA SUNIL),COCHIN vs. THE ACIT(CEN,CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A is invalid. Immediately, the ld. DR Shri M. Anil Kumar produced the assessment folder for verification of the ld. Representative for the assessee and submitted that search was conducted in the case of Smt. Asha Sunil and search warrant was also issued in her name. After verifying the files

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A is invalid. Immediately, the ld. DR Shri M. Anil Kumar produced the assessment folder for verification of the ld. Representative for the assessee and submitted that search was conducted in the case of Smt. Asha Sunil and search warrant was also issued in her name. After verifying the files

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A is invalid. Immediately, the ld. DR Shri M. Anil Kumar produced the assessment folder for verification of the ld. Representative for the assessee and submitted that search was conducted in the case of Smt. Asha Sunil and search warrant was also issued in her name. After verifying the files

SMT.ASHA MENON( ASHA SUNIL),COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A is invalid. Immediately, the ld. DR Shri M. Anil Kumar produced the assessment folder for verification of the ld. Representative for the assessee and submitted that search was conducted in the case of Smt. Asha Sunil and search warrant was also issued in her name. After verifying the files

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A is invalid. Immediately, the ld. DR Shri M. Anil Kumar produced the assessment folder for verification of the ld. Representative for the assessee and submitted that search was conducted in the case of Smt. Asha Sunil and search warrant was also issued in her name. After verifying the files

M/S. JOSEPH GEORGE & CO.,,PATHANAPURAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

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

Bench: S/Shri Abraham P. George, Am & George George K., Jm

penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act amounting to Rs. 2,34,304/-. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a firm engaged in the business of running a Lodge. It also derives rental income from letting out of building to Federal Bank and National Trading Co. For the assessment year

SMT.JAMMELA S,KOLLAM vs. THE DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

200% penalty in the quantum of 2 I.T.A. No.463 /Coch/2019 income concealed/for which inaccurate particulars were given. The assessee vide reply dated 24.02.2012 stated that the addition and disallowances sustained in appeal does not warrant imposition of penalty. The relevant points in assessee’s reply are given below: (i) The sale value adopted for rejection quality kernels was not proved

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

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink

M/S JEEVAN TELECASTING CORPN LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, ITA Nos.606 to 610/Coch/2010 are partly allowed and ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

penalty under section 271 C of the Income Tax Act". 7. Hence, as per the directions of the Hon. High Court, the assessee has to prove before this Hon. Tribunal that (i) The deductees have paid the tax in respect of the payments made to them by the assessee. (ii) Whether the payments in respect to Backhaul charges and Uplink