REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

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

20] ■ Having analyzed the legal position as enumerated under section 153A in respect of assessments pursuant to search action under section 132, now lets come back to whether the assessee is entitled to make a fresh claim under Chapter VI-A, which has not been claimed in the original return of income under section 139(1). It is seen that

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

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

20] ■ Having analyzed the legal position as enumerated under section 153A in respect of assessments pursuant to search action under section 132, now lets come back to whether the assessee is entitled to make a fresh claim under Chapter VI-A, which has not been claimed in the original return of income under section 139(1). It is seen that

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

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

20] ■ Having analyzed the legal position as enumerated under section 153A in respect of assessments pursuant to search action under section 132, now lets come back to whether the assessee is entitled to make a fresh claim under Chapter VI-A, which has not been claimed in the original return of income under section 139(1). It is seen that

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

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

20] ■ Having analyzed the legal position as enumerated under section 153A in respect of assessments pursuant to search action under section 132, now lets come back to whether the assessee is entitled to make a fresh claim under Chapter VI-A, which has not been claimed in the original return of income under section 139(1). It is seen that

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

20]\nHaving analyzed the legal position as enumerated under section 153A in respect of\nassessments pursuant to search action under section 132, now lets come back to\nwhether the assessee is entitled to make a fresh claim under Chapter VI-A, which\nhas not been claimed in the original return of income under section 139(1). It is seen\nthat

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S APPOLLO TYRES LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Manjunatha G, Am

reassessment. 9. Appeal effect order dated 09 Apr 2007 7,03,08,250 3,63,84,519 09/04/2007 passed by AO post ITAT, Kochi order dated 28/03/2007 10 Revision order passed by 08 Mar 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax u/ 263 on 08/03/2010 against appeal effect order passed by AO on 09/04/2007 11 Appeal effect order passed

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL ,KAKKANAD vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, the notice u/s 148 was issued.” 9. The contention of the Ld. A.R. is that the reasons recorded very clearly show that, the only

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, the notice u/s 148 was issued.” 9. The contention of the Ld. A.R. is that the reasons recorded very clearly show that, the only

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, the notice u/s 148 was issued.” 9. The contention of the Ld. A.R. is that the reasons recorded very clearly show that, the only

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL.,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

20,12/986/- resulting in a overnight increase of Rs.64,22,411/-. Since Income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs.62,44,411/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, the notice u/s 148 was issued.” 9. The contention of the Ld. A.R. is that the reasons recorded very clearly show that, the only

FEDERAL BANK LTD,KOCHI vs. ACIT CORP. CIRCLE-1(1 ) , KOCHI

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment J year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001." The Hon’ble Court observed that sub-sections (2) and (3) were introduced to the main section