AVINISSERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1),THRISSUR, THRISSUR

68 taxmann.com 298/239 Taxman 417/384 ITR 490,\nwhere in a batch of appeals challenging assessments completed under\nsection 147 read with 143(3)/144 of the Income-tax Act, the High\nCourt, after considering section 80P(4

M/S PAZHAYANGADI G GOLD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 1 & TPS, KANNUR

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2018-19 Pazhayangadi G Gold, Ito, Ward-1& Tps, Eazhome Pazhayangadi, Kannur Kannur-670303 Vs. Pan : Aaufp9485G (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Arun Raj S. Adv. For Revenue : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr (Heard In Hybrid Bench) Date Of Hearing : 25-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025 O R D E R

68 of the Act. The AO further recorded the satisfaction that the income is under-reported by the assessee, and accordingly, a penalty under section 270A of the Act was initiated for under-reporting of income. 4

BHIMA JEWELLERS,SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD vs. THE PR CIT, KOZHIKKODE, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.208/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Bhima Jewellers, Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income- 6/785 Ai, Tax, Kozhikode. Mysore Road, Chungum Junction, Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad-673 592. [Pan: Aakfb 9817C] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Revenue By Shri Dhanaraj A. Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri R. Krishnan, Ca Date Of Hearing 05/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 20/08/2018

68,69,69A. 69B and 69C, falls within the "Scope of total income" as defined in section 2(45)/5 and is therefore chargeable to tax under section 4

VILAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 337,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

68 taxmann.com 298 (Ker.) having decided the very issue in assessee’s favour. Ordered accordingly. Vilvattam Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 5. The Revenue’s next vehement contentions seeks to treat the assessee as a cooperative bank u/sec.80P(2)(4) than a credit cooperative society as per Pr. CIT vs. Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank

VILAVATTAM SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD NO 337,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

68 taxmann.com 298 (Ker.) having decided the very issue in assessee’s favour. Ordered accordingly. Vilvattam Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 5. The Revenue’s next vehement contentions seeks to treat the assessee as a cooperative bank u/sec.80P(2)(4) than a credit cooperative society as per Pr. CIT vs. Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank

RAMAPURAM NORTH AISWARYA PRADAYINI SCB LTD ,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ITO WARD 3, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year 2017-18 Ramapuram North Aiswarya Pradayini Scb Ltd. Ramapuram North, The Income Tax Officer Vs. Keerikadu P.O., Alappuzha Ward - 3, Pin - 690508 Alappuzha Pan Aacar2023D (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 taxmann.com 298 (Ker.) These Revenue’s contentions rejected accordingly. 3 Ramapuram North Aiswarya Pradayini SCB Ltd. 4. Learned DR’s next case is that assessee had violated the corresponding norms by not having extended credit facility by way of agricultural loans to the eligible members. We find that hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank

SRI SRAVAN KUMAR NEELA,NALGONDA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the instant appeals by the assesses are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasuma Maheshwara Rao Chinni Asst. Cit, Central Circle -1, Hno. 7-298, 7 Ward Aayakar Bhavan (North Block) Gandhi Bomma Centre Vs. Kozhikode 673001 Dachepalle, Guntur 522414 [Pan:Arjpc0342D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 to 69D. 4.9 The provisions of 115BBE taxing certain types of income @ 60% were brought on statute by Finance Act, 2017 after demonization, after introduction of prevention of Black Money (Undisclosed foreign income & assets) Act; Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, etc., with a view to curb the mischief of subsequently disclosing the undisclosed cash/entries/assets of earlier years

SRI UMA MAHESHWARA RAO CHINNI,GUNTUR vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the instant appeals by the assesses are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasuma Maheshwara Rao Chinni Asst. Cit, Central Circle -1, Hno. 7-298, 7 Ward Aayakar Bhavan (North Block) Gandhi Bomma Centre Vs. Kozhikode 673001 Dachepalle, Guntur 522414 [Pan:Arjpc0342D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

68 to 69D. 4.9 The provisions of 115BBE taxing certain types of income @ 60% were brought on statute by Finance Act, 2017 after demonization, after introduction of prevention of Black Money (Undisclosed foreign income & assets) Act; Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, etc., with a view to curb the mischief of subsequently disclosing the undisclosed cash/entries/assets of earlier years

M/S.SAHYADRI AGENCIES LTD,KANDNASSERY, THRISSUR vs. THE ITO, WD-1(3), THRISSUR

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

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

section 68 of the I.T.Act in respect of issuance of OPCCPS. The CIT also relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case 4

THE MANNUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,PALAKKAD vs. THE ITO WD-2, PALAKKAD

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

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

4) nor in response to the notices issued u/s 148 and 142(1) of the I.T.Act. The Assessing Officer concluded that as per section 80A(5) of the I.T.Act, the assessee is not entitled to any deduction on account of non-filing of the return. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer denying the benefit of deduction

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

section 68, so as to be able to contend, on that basis, that the investment is recorded in the books. In the absene of any explanation as to the source thereof, the basis of the addition continues to be the unexplained nature and the source of the investment. The Revenue claiming interest u/s. 234A(1) r.w.s 234A(4

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

section 68, so as to be able to contend, on that basis, that the investment is recorded in the books. In the absene of any explanation as to the source thereof, the basis of the addition continues to be the unexplained nature and the source of the investment. The Revenue claiming interest u/s. 234A(1) r.w.s 234A(4

SHAHUL HAMEED,MANANTHAVADY vs. ITO, WARD-2, KALPETTA

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

4 ITA No.355/Coch/2024. Sri.Sahul Hameed. law in the provisions of the Act, therefore is not an issue which could be corrected by way of rectification. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. In the present case, there is no dispute regarding

M/S. HEERA KERALA DEVELOPERS P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

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

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Heera Kerala Developers Acit - Circle 1(1) Pvt. Ltd. Thiruvananthapurm Tc 15/1553(5), Heera Park Vs. Mp Appan Road, Vazhuthacaud Thiruvananthapurm 695014 Pan – Aabch8810R Appellant Respondent

4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned PC IT has erred in holding that the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act with respect to set-off of income taxable under section 68

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State

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

section 80P(2)(a)(i). (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of CIT(A) is correct in not duly considering the following case laws (a) Sabargantha Zilla Kharid Vechar Sangh Ltd. (203 ITR 1027) (SC) (b) Perinthalmanna Service Co-operative Bank (363 ITR 68) (Kerala) (c) CIT Vs Kerala State