THE ITO, KOLLAM vs. SRI.A.SHIHABUDEEN, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

90,906 including the cost of electrical work. The difference in the cost of construction on the building which came to Rs.24,87,474 was treated as unexplained investment and spread over the assessment years 2000-2001 to 2004-2005. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The assessee carried the matter in appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal sustained

THE ITO, KOLLAM vs. SRI.A.SHIHABUDEEN, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

90,906 including the cost of electrical work. The difference in the cost of construction on the building which came to Rs.24,87,474 was treated as unexplained investment and spread over the assessment years 2000-2001 to 2004-2005. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The assessee carried the matter in appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal sustained

THE ITO, KOLLAM vs. SRI.A.SHIHABUDEEN, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

90,906 including the cost of electrical work. The difference in the cost of construction on the building which came to Rs.24,87,474 was treated as unexplained investment and spread over the assessment years 2000-2001 to 2004-2005. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The assessee carried the matter in appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal sustained

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

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

90,039/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- on various dates and is confirmed as income even though the amounts are transferred from the bank A/c of Asha Sunil (wife) which is directly verifiable by entries from bank to bank and is liable to be exempted. k) That the Hon'ble High Court ought to have considered the fact that

SRI.K.RAJAGOPAL MENON,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

90,610. 4. Aggrieved by the order imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred an appeal to the first 4 Sri.K Rajagopal Menon. appellate authority. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the imposition of penalty. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follow:- “5. In strict interpretation

THE ACIT, TRICHUR vs. ST.ANTONY'S TIMBER DEP, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5.6. In view of the above discussion of the facts and provisions of law, the Assessing Officer was satisfied that this is a fit case for imposing penalty u/s I.T.A. No.294/Coch/2018 & CO No.63/coch/2018 271(l)(c) as the assessee had concealed the particulars of its income. The minimum penalty

M/S.PRINCE ROLLER FLOUR MILLS P. LTD,PALAKKAD vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the

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

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act were initiated separately. Accordingly, the assessment was completed as under: Income from Business[as returned] Rs. 4812959/- Addition (as per para 5.3] Rs.18041977/- Total Rs.22854956/- Less: Chapter VIA Deduction (80G) Rs. 2500/- Total Income Assessed Rs.22852436/- AY 2014-15 Table 1 Sl. Products Qty. Produced Production Sale Value Sale

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.PRINCE ROLLER FLOUR MILLS P. LTD, PALAKKAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the

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

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act were initiated separately. Accordingly, the assessment was completed as under: Income from Business[as returned] Rs. 4812959/- Addition (as per para 5.3] Rs.18041977/- Total Rs.22854956/- Less: Chapter VIA Deduction (80G) Rs. 2500/- Total Income Assessed Rs.22852436/- AY 2014-15 Table 1 Sl. Products Qty. Produced Production Sale Value Sale

M/S.VIJAYA HOSPITALITY AND RESORTS LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ADCIT(TDS), COCHIN

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

271. In other words, clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 271C (dealing with failure to remit the deducted tax) is not excluded or the benefit is not confined to the instance covered by section 271C(1)(a) alone. Section 273B itself starts with a “non obstante clause” saying that the benefit is to be extended, to the extent

KADUNGAMPARAMBIL MANUAL GEORGE JOSEPH,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO , NON CORPORATE WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

271(1)(c) penalties for concealment and furnishing of inaccrate particulars of income involving varyig sums in these appeals. Learned DR seeks to submit that AY 2017-18 also involves section 270A penalty of under reporting of incomes as a consequence to misreporting. We are of the considered view that once the lower authorities have estimated the assessee’s book