E T DEVASSY AND SONS FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE 1(1)& TPS, THRISSUR

Bench: the Assessing Officer who partly agreed but disagreed finally with the same and made addition in the quantum

21,690/-. The said return has been selected for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer completed the regular scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act vide Assessment Order, dated 30/12/2019, determining at a total income of the Assessee at INR.76,16,170/- after making, inter alia, an addition of 2 Assessment Year 2017-2018 INR.25,00,000 under

SRI.THOMAS EAPEN,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO, WD-5, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 68 of the 27,94,306 Unexplained cash deposit in Act Bank 2. Undisclosed profit 3,14,953 Profit on undisclosed sales 3. Interest income 27,265 Difference as per 26AS On examination of the bank account statements of the assessee at various banks, it was ascertained that total of credits in different banks during the year

M/S.SNEHA TRUST FOR CHARITY EDUATION,PALALLAD vs. THE ACIT, PALAKKAD

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

21,10,000 2. P.Laila 6,00,000 -- 1,70,000 7,70,000 3. E.Raheema 2,50,000 -- -- 2,50,000 4. E.Rahana 2,50,000 -- -- 2,50,000 Total 17,00,000 4,90,000 11,90,000 33,80,000 ITA No.731/Coch/2019. 2 M/s.Sneha Trust for Charity and Education. 3.1 The Assessing Officer was of the opinion

SMT.K.B.SONY,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, i) The appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

68 of the Act is justified. This ground of appeal of the assessee is rejected. 11. The next ground is with regard to addition of Rs.2,45,198/- as agricultural income as undisclosed income. 11.1 The facts are that assessee claimed Rs.2,45,198/- as agricultural income. The Assessing Officer relied on Part-IV of the Finance Act which elaborates

V.K.M FEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED,TAMILNADU vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, THRISSUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2017-18 Vkm Feeds Private Limited, Acit, Central Circle, 2, Reservoir Street, Thrissur Venkatesa Colony, Vs. Pollachi-642001 Tamil Nadu Pan : Aafcv2454D (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shaji Paulose, Ca For Revenue : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr (Heard In Hybrid Bench) Date Of Hearing : 25-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025

68 of the Act. 20. However, it is an undisputed fact that the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act has better evidentiary value but it is also a settled position of law that addition cannot be sustained merely on the basis of the statement. There has to be some material corroborating the content of the statements

AROOR CO-OP URBAN SOCIETY LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. ITO, KOZHIKKODE

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

Bench: Shrigeorge George K.And Shrilaxmi Prasad Sahuaroor Co-Operative Urbn Society Dcit, Central Prossing Centre Aroor P.O., Kakkattil 673507 Bangalore Vs.

21,117/- for which claim u/s 80P has been made and this claim was allowed by the AO. Deduction u/s 80P can only be allowed to the extent of business income only and cannot be allowed on Reserve to remove bad and doubtful debts and Reserve for interest arrears. Even otherwise" Section 80AC has been amended from

M/S.IBS SOFTWARE SERVICES P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

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

68,911/-. The DRP concurred with the Assessing Officer and rejected the objections raised by the Assessee. Before us it was contended on behalf of the Assessee that loans were granted on account of commercial expediency and out of interest free funds. However, we note that the Assessing Officer/DRP has returned concurrent finding that no supporting documents were filed

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SMT.ASHA MENON( ASHA SUNIL),COCHIN vs. THE ACIT(CEN,CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SMT.ASHA MENON( ASHA SUNIL),COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SMT.ASHA MENON( ASHA SUNIL),COCHIN vs. THE ACIT(CEN,CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

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

68 of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We find merit in the arguments of both the Counsels. Hence, in the interest of justice, this issue is I.T.A. Nos. 45-51/Coch/2014 & ITA Nos. 594 to 596/Coch/2018 S.P. Nos. 51-53/Coch/2018 remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer instead

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM vs. ARUN RAJ PILLAI, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

21,82,709/- during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration ii) received money through several bank accounts from various persons aggregating to Rs. 50,00,000/- iii) received funds through banking channels from banks of Nagaland based persons/entities Rs. 13,00,000/- 6. The assessing officer had brought to tax the above

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM vs. ARUN RAJ PILLAI, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

21,82,709/- during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration ii) received money through several bank accounts from various persons aggregating to Rs. 50,00,000/- iii) received funds through banking channels from banks of Nagaland based persons/entities Rs. 13,00,000/- 6. The assessing officer had brought to tax the above

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM vs. ARUN RAJ PILLAI, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

21,82,709/- during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration ii) received money through several bank accounts from various persons aggregating to Rs. 50,00,000/- iii) received funds through banking channels from banks of Nagaland based persons/entities Rs. 13,00,000/- 6. The assessing officer had brought to tax the above