MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

reassessment was completed vide order dated 28.03.2013 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act after making addition of Rs. 7,33,77,497/- being the amount paid to Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management (hereinafter called “MPCMS”) towards professional charges/consultancy u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO,CIRCLE CENTRAL, TRIVANDRUM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

reassessment was completed vide order dated 28.03.2013 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act after making addition of Rs. 7,33,77,497/- being the amount paid to Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management (hereinafter called “MPCMS”) towards professional charges/consultancy u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS

MUTHOOT FINCORP LIMITED,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

reassessment was completed vide order dated 28.03.2013 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act after making addition of Rs. 7,33,77,497/- being the amount paid to Muthoot Pappachan Consultancy & Management (hereinafter called “MPCMS”) towards professional charges/consultancy u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS

KERALA STATE COOPERATIVE EMPLOYEES PENSION BOARD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

TDS OF Rs. 6,07,52,715/- and the same was rejected by the AO vide order dated 08.06.2023 passed u/s. 154 of the Act by holding that in the absence of a valid return of income no refund can be granted and also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

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

reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid. (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section

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

reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid. (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section

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

reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid. (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section

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

reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid. (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254, or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section

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

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

TDS u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. In the said order, the AO had also stated that penalty proceedings u/s. 270A(1) of the Act would be initiated separately. The AO had not specifically mentioned under which limb underreporting was done by the assessee in view of the above said facts and circumstances of the case. The AO further

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS from advertisement charge was seized in search warranting the disallowance and that without such a seizure no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made in a search assessment as held by the Ho'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Meeta Gutgutia (2017) (the SLP flied by the Revenue against this judgment was dismissed

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS from advertisement charge was seized in search warranting the disallowance and that without such a seizure no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made in a search assessment as held by the Ho'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Meeta Gutgutia (2017) (the SLP flied by the Revenue against this judgment was dismissed

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS from advertisement charge was seized in search warranting the disallowance and that without such a seizure no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made in a search assessment as held by the Ho'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Meeta Gutgutia (2017) (the SLP flied by the Revenue against this judgment was dismissed

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

TDS from advertisement charge was seized in search warranting the disallowance and that without such a seizure no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made in a search assessment as held by the Ho'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Meeta Gutgutia (2017) (the SLP flied by the Revenue against this judgment was dismissed

CLINT MARTEL WILFRED,ERNAKULAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL CIT (A) BENGALURU - 12, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Clint Martel Wilfred Dcit (Interational Taxation) Clint Dale, Moolankuzhy Kochi Vs. Nazreth, Ernakulam 682002 [Pan: Abnpw6970H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS due on the compensation was deducted and remitted by the Special Tahsildar on 21.05.2008. However, the father of the appellant, to whom the compensation was due, passed away in the same month and the compensation could be claimed only after filing details of the legal heirs. The amount of compensation was disbursed to the legal heirs including the appellant

MARIAMMA JOSEPH,KOTTAYAMN vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is decided on the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasmariamma Joseph Asst. Cit, Central Circle Hotel Floral Park Kottayam 686001 Gandhinagar Vs. Kottayam 686008 [Pan:Accpj9135F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

reassessment exceeds the tax on the original income for the period commences from 1st April of the assessment year and ends on the date of completion of the assessment. Here the difference of tax on the original assessment and tax determined u/s.153A comes to Rs.15,36,914/- (1765028-228114). However, in the proceedings dated 4/5/2016 interest u/s.234B(3) is calculated

A & B ASSOCIATES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by directing the AO to -

TDS credit was not granted, though income was taxed on the basis of 26AS. All the details could be easily gathered from M/s Idea Cellular Lad. before proceeding us 144 of the Act. Nothing was done by the assessing officer. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had not considered these facts and justified the irregularities and actions

THIRUVENKITAM VEERIAH REDDIAR,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE & TPS, KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year: 2018-19 Thiruvenkitam Veeriah Reddiar .......... Appellant Through Legal Heir Beena Veeriah Reddy 5, Veeriah Reddiar, K.K. Road, Kottayam [Pan: Achpr9611D] Vs. Dcit, Circle& Tds, Kottayam .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri R. Krishnan, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 05.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2025

TDS, Kottayam .......... Respondent Appellant by: Shri R. Krishnan, CA Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 05.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 27.03.2025 for Assessment Year