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

section 234B(4) does not speak about the terminus point of levy of interest, the period mentioned u/s 234B(1) alone can be reckoned. The observation of the CIT(A) that there has been a reduction of assessed income as per the reassessment order u/s 147 dated 20.03.2000 vis-à-vis order u/s 143(3

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,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.MALANKARA PLANTATIONS LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, CIR-1, KOTTAYAM

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

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

u/s. 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act for the assessment year 2009-10.” This ground was overlooked by the CIT(A) and not at all adjudicated by him. Further, he directly adjudicated the issue relating to the disallowance of replantation allowance. In our opinion, he ought to have adjudicated the issue relating to validity of reassessment

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

143(3) of the Act. The assessing officer reopened the case under section 147 of the Act after recording reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment and after necessary approval, issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In the reassessment, which was completed on 23rd March 2016, the Assessing Officer added back the difference of Rs 64.22 lakh

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

143(3) of the Act. The assessing officer reopened the case under section 147 of the Act after recording reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment and after necessary approval, issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In the reassessment, which was completed on 23rd March 2016, the Assessing Officer added back the difference of Rs 64.22 lakh

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

143(3) of the Act. The assessing officer reopened the case under section 147 of the Act after recording reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment and after necessary approval, issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In the reassessment, which was completed on 23rd March 2016, the Assessing Officer added back the difference of Rs 64.22 lakh

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

143(3) of the Act. The assessing officer reopened the case under section 147 of the Act after recording reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment and after necessary approval, issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In the reassessment, which was completed on 23rd March 2016, the Assessing Officer added back the difference of Rs 64.22 lakh

M/S SKYLINE E TECH,KOCHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 26.12.2008 passed by DCIT, Circle 2(2), Ernakulam was dismissed. 14. Assessee is aggrieved with the same and has preferred the appeal challenging the reopening of the assessment and disallowance u/s. 43B. 15. The brief facts of the case show that assessee is a partnership firm whose assessment on returned income

M/S SKYLINE E TECH,KOCHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(2), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 26.12.2008 passed by DCIT, Circle 2(2), Ernakulam was dismissed. 14. Assessee is aggrieved with the same and has preferred the appeal challenging the reopening of the assessment and disallowance u/s. 43B. 15. The brief facts of the case show that assessee is a partnership firm whose assessment on returned income

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)

3) Where, as a result of an order of reassessment or recomputation under section 147 or section 153A, the amount on which interest was payable in respect of shortfall in payment of advance tax for any financial year under sub-section (1) is increased, the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate of one per cent

THE CHOICE FOUNDATION,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

147 read with section 148 of the Income Tax Act as confirmed by the reasons for initiating the proceedings under section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer. The period of limitation provided for under subsection (2) of section 263 of the Act would begin to run from the date of the date the Intimation u/s 143(1). By virtue

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.

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or assets

POPULAR MOTORWORLD PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 2(5), KOCHI

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of tangible material. 5. On perusal of the record it emerges that assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was framed on the Assessee vide Assessment Order, dated 28/12/2016. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer recorded the following reasons for reopening the assessment: “(a) Subsequently on verifying the records it was found that

M/S SANTHIMADOM HERBAL CITY TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

147 or reassessment under section 153A, on the amount by which the tax on the total income determined on the basis of such reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the earlier assessment aforesaid. Explanation.—[* * *] (4) Where as a result of an order under

M/S SANTHIMADOM HERBAL CITY TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

147 or reassessment under section 153A, on the amount by which the tax on the total income determined on the basis of such reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the earlier assessment aforesaid. Explanation.—[* * *] (4) Where as a result of an order under

ACIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 was initiated as per explanation 2c(iii) & (iv) given under provisos to section 147 whereby excessive relief allowed and excessive loss or any other allowance admitted are deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, i.e. the reopening was done on the income which has been made subject of excessive relief