KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), THIRUVANANHAPURAM

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2018-19

13 district co-operative banks with the assessee from 29/11/2019, there is a change in the software and therefore the complete datas could not be retrieved for the financial year 2017-18. The assessee further filed the details of the interest on the fixed deposits maintained by the individuals, PF trust and other co-operative societies. The assessee further submitted

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

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

8 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 furnished at a later date with the permission of the AO who may permit the assessee to do so after recording its reasons for so doing." 13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor's report could only be furnished upto the stage of framing of assessment as the power

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

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

8 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 furnished at a later date with the permission of the AO who may permit the assessee to do so after recording its reasons for so doing." 13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor's report could only be furnished upto the stage of framing of assessment as the power

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

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

8 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 furnished at a later date with the permission of the AO who may permit the assessee to do so after recording its reasons for so doing." 13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor's report could only be furnished upto the stage of framing of assessment as the power

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

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

8 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 furnished at a later date with the permission of the AO who may permit the assessee to do so after recording its reasons for so doing." 13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor's report could only be furnished upto the stage of framing of assessment as the power

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

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

8 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 furnished at a later date with the permission of the AO who may permit the assessee to do so after recording its reasons for so doing." 13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor's report could only be furnished upto the stage of framing of assessment as the power

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

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

8 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 furnished at a later date with the permission of the AO who may permit the assessee to do so after recording its reasons for so doing." 13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor's report could only be furnished upto the stage of framing of assessment as the power

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

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

8 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 furnished at a later date with the permission of the AO who may permit the assessee to do so after recording its reasons for so doing." 13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor's report could only be furnished upto the stage of framing of assessment as the power

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

8) and 2(40)), where the same is subsequently set aside for fresh assessment. Despite it being subsequently set aside, the Hon'ble Court held it to be the date of the original order. The reason that found favour with the Hon'ble Court, as a reading of it’s detailed judgment shows, is that once the tax paid, either

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

8) and 2(40)), where the same is subsequently set aside for fresh assessment. Despite it being subsequently set aside, the Hon'ble Court held it to be the date of the original order. The reason that found favour with the Hon'ble Court, as a reading of it’s detailed judgment shows, is that once the tax paid, either

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

8) and 2(40)), where the same is subsequently set aside for fresh assessment. Despite it being subsequently set aside, the Hon'ble Court held it to be the date of the original order. The reason that found favour with the Hon'ble Court, as a reading of it’s detailed judgment shows, is that once the tax paid, either

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

8) and 2(40)), where the same is subsequently set aside for fresh assessment. Despite it being subsequently set aside, the Hon'ble Court held it to be the date of the original order. The reason that found favour with the Hon'ble Court, as a reading of it’s detailed judgment shows, is that once the tax paid, either

SRI. ELDHOSE K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THEDCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, appeals for assessment year 2006-07 to 2008-09 and 2010-11 are allowed while the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10, 2011-12 and 2012-13 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal & Shri George George K.

reassess the total income with respect to each assessment year following the six assessment years specified in sub-clauses (a) and (b) of section 153A.” We, therefore, dismiss ground No. 4. Thus, the appeal for assessment year 2009-10 is partly allowed. 10. Now coming to assessment year 2011-12. So far ground Nos. 1 to 3 are concerned

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

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

8. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) is erred in not admitting the additional grounds seeking deduction u/s. 80(IA) of the Act in respect of profit derived from the project of water works. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The claim for deduction

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

13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal bearing ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 for AY 2012-13 are stated herein. 4. Brief facts

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

13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal bearing ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 for AY 2012-13 are stated herein. 4. Brief facts

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

13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal bearing ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 for AY 2012-13 are stated herein. 4. Brief facts

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

13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal bearing ITA No. 267/Coch/2021 for AY 2012-13 are stated herein. 4. Brief facts

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

8. ITAT order passed u/s 28 Mar 2007 Partially allowed 2151 for the appeal filed against CIT(A) order of assessment and 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