M/S.SOORYA DRUG HOUSE,THODUPUZHA vs. THE ITO,WD-2, THODUPUZHA

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

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

260 for the assessment years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 respectively. The assessments were completed for both the assessment years u/s 143 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T.Act on 28.03.2016 and 30.03.2016 for assessment years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, respectively. In the assessments completed, total income determined for assessment year 2012-2013 was at Rs.26,28,950 and for assessment

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 E. Where the appellant has withdrawn the claim during the course of the assessment proceedings, the penalty under section 270A

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

Section 153C of the Act. The finding of fact recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not on this aspect of the matter. As already excerpted, the Tribunal examined yet another circumstance and recorded a finding in the common order impugned in the appeal. We are pursuaded with the argument of Adv. Navneeth N. Nath that the Tribunal

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

Section 153C of the Act. The finding of fact recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not on this aspect of the matter. As already excerpted, the Tribunal examined yet another circumstance and recorded a finding in the common order impugned in the appeal. We are pursuaded with the argument of Adv. Navneeth N. Nath that the Tribunal

SRI.GEORGE M.GEORGE,KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT, CIR-1, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

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

260. The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed vide order dated 27.12.2011 assessing the total income of Rs.1,29,71,379. In the said assessment, the Assessing Officer treated the agricultural income of Rs.12,36,000 as income from other sources by invoking provisions of section 68 of the I.T.Act. The relevant finding of the Assessing Officer reads as follows

SMT.MITHRA PAUL,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE ITO,WD-1, THODUPUZHA

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

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

260 Since the net income from the house property was a loss, I have not included the same in the return. 2. I am enclosing a confirmation letter dated 23-08-2016 from my sister regarding gift by her and my mother to me during the F.Y, 2013-14.1 had also extracted and sold gravel earth from property at Kanikachal