M/S.PEROORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, WD-2(1), TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

145. viii. computation of income in accordance with cash or mercantile system as applicable. ix. consideration of Form 3CD which is to be called for. B. Determine income from house property, capital gains and income from other sources, if any, in accordance with provisions of relevant chapters after making due enquiries and calling for information. C. Compute Gross Total Income

M/S.PERRORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

145. viii. computation of income in accordance with cash or mercantile system as applicable. ix. consideration of Form 3CD which is to be called for. B. Determine income from house property, capital gains and income from other sources, if any, in accordance with provisions of relevant chapters after making due enquiries and calling for information. C. Compute Gross Total Income

M/S.PERRORKADA SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

145. viii. computation of income in accordance with cash or mercantile system as applicable. ix. consideration of Form 3CD which is to be called for. B. Determine income from house property, capital gains and income from other sources, if any, in accordance with provisions of relevant chapters after making due enquiries and calling for information. C. Compute Gross Total Income

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

145 ITR 186 (SC); and Jamna Prasad Kanhaiyalal v. CIT [1981] 130 ITR 244 (SC). The accounts, it may be appreciated, only form part of the assessee’s explanation. It is this that led us to state of the addition for both the years being on account of unexplained investment; its routing through accounts, where so, notwithstanding, which cannot

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

145 ITR 186 (SC); and Jamna Prasad Kanhaiyalal v. CIT [1981] 130 ITR 244 (SC). The accounts, it may be appreciated, only form part of the assessee’s explanation. It is this that led us to state of the addition for both the years being on account of unexplained investment; its routing through accounts, where so, notwithstanding, which cannot

M/S. MATHA ENTERPRISES,,ANGAMALLY vs. ACIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

145 (3) of the Act and the assessment was made in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 7.9.4 In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made the assessment of the income of the assesseefor this assessment year as follows

M/S. MATHA ENTERPRISES,,ANGAMALLY vs. ACIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

145 (3) of the Act and the assessment was made in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 7.9.4 In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made the assessment of the income of the assesseefor this assessment year as follows

M/S BEST BAKERY & ICE CREAM PARLOUR,ANGAMALLY vs. ACIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

145 (3) of the Act and the assessment was made in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 7.9.4 In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made the assessment of the income of the assesseefor this assessment year as follows

DCIT, ERNAKULAM vs. MATHA ENTERPRISES, ANGAMALLY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

145 (3) of the Act and the assessment was made in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 7.9.4 In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made the assessment of the income of the assesseefor this assessment year as follows

M/S. MATHA ENTERPRISES,,ANGAMALLY vs. ACIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

145 (3) of the Act and the assessment was made in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 7.9.4 In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made the assessment of the income of the assesseefor this assessment year as follows

M/S BEST BAKERY & ICE CREAM PARLOUR,ANGAMALLY vs. ACIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

145 (3) of the Act and the assessment was made in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 7.9.4 In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made the assessment of the income of the assesseefor this assessment year as follows

M/S BEST BAKERY & ICE CREAM PARLOUR,ANGAMALLY vs. ACIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

145 (3) of the Act and the assessment was made in the manner provided under section 144 of the Act. M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 7.9.4 In view of the above, the Assessing Officer made the assessment of the income of the assesseefor this assessment year as follows

THE THALIPARAMBA CO-OP URBANK BANK LTD,TALIPARAMABA vs. THE PR.CIT, KOZHIKKODE

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

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

68 of 2014. High Court of Judicator of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) and other decisions on this point. The Ld. AR also submitted that section 43D of the Income tax Act had been amended subsequently by Finance Act 2017, by including therein the words "Co-op. banks" for the purpose of deduction with effect from 01/04/2018. Though this amendment

MARINE BUSINESS ASSOCIATES,KANNUR vs. ITO, KANNUR

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

68,810/- being incorrect calculation of VAT on the Closing stock and then application of section 145A which required 3 ITA No.558/Coch/2023. Marine Business Associates. disclosure as per Income Computation and Disclosure Standards Il Valuation of Inventories (ICDS-Il). The AO should have appreciated the fact that income Computation and Disclosure Standards II Valuation of Inventories prevails over

THE ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S.KUNNEL ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS P. LTD, KOCHI

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

68 of Finance Act, 1994 read with rule 6 of Service Tax Rules, 1994, the service tax becomes payable only on receipt of service tax from the client. Therefore, the amount of service tax included in bills but not received could not be disallowed under s. 43B’. After analysing the relevant provisions of Incometax Act as well as Service

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

68,899 Kerala State Co-operative Bank 6,21,881 District Treasury 5,43,014 Kerala State Consumer Federation Co-operative Society 15,97,654 Consumerfed 20,12,798 Kerala State Rubber Marketing Federation Co-operative 5,56,484 Society Neyyattinkara School Teachers Cooperative Society 2,32,500 Trivandrum Taluk Co-operative Employees Society 1,05,000 TOTAL

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

68,899 Kerala State Co-operative Bank 6,21,881 District Treasury 5,43,014 Kerala State Consumer Federation Co-operative Society 15,97,654 Consumerfed 20,12,798 Kerala State Rubber Marketing Federation Co-operative 5,56,484 Society Neyyattinkara School Teachers Cooperative Society 2,32,500 Trivandrum Taluk Co-operative Employees Society 1,05,000 TOTAL

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

68,899 Kerala State Co-operative Bank 6,21,881 District Treasury 5,43,014 Kerala State Consumer Federation Co-operative Society 15,97,654 Consumerfed 20,12,798 Kerala State Rubber Marketing Federation Co-operative 5,56,484 Society Neyyattinkara School Teachers Cooperative Society 2,32,500 Trivandrum Taluk Co-operative Employees Society 1,05,000 TOTAL