DCIT, KANNUR vs. M/S MANJOO & CO.,, KANNUR

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year: 2006-07

price of Rs. 65,69,820/- received, only an amount of Rs. 28,75,207 has been shown in the P&Laccount. The difference is therefore Rs.30,94,637/-. 2. Interest income as per TDS certificates is Rs, 1,19,480/- whereas interest income returned is Rs. 46,560/-. The difference in this respect is Rs. 72,920/- 3. Loss

KEYA FOODS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,CHERTHALA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Keya Foods International Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Pcit, Kp/111/212 Kuthlathode, Kochi. Thuravoor P. O., Cherthala Taluk, Alappuzha – 688 532. Pan : Aagca 5456 M Appellant Respondent

Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue. 263. (1) The [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner may call for and examine the record of any proceeding under this Act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by the Assessing Officer 89[or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous

SMT.MITHRA PAUL,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE ITO,WD-1, THODUPUZHA

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

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

transfer of Rs.60,00,00/- as gift to the assessee vide letter dated 23/08/2016. The assessee had not revealed these receipts tantamount to Rs.95,00,000/- in the return of income. The Assessing Officer added back an amount of Rs.9,50,000/- as undisclosed income, which is 10% of these receipts. As there were no expenses involved in the sale

MALANADU MILK PRODUCERS SOCIETY,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, TVM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue. 263. (1) The [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner may call for and examine the ITA NoS.632 & 633/Coch/2022 Page 9 of 12 record of any proceeding under this Act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by the Assessing Officer 89[or the Transfer Pricing Officer

MALANADU FARMERS SOCIETY ,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT EXEMPTIONS, TVM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.

Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue. 263. (1) The [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner may call for and examine the ITA NoS.632 & 633/Coch/2022 Page 9 of 12 record of any proceeding under this Act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by the Assessing Officer 89[or the Transfer Pricing Officer

SHRI.VISWANATHA MANOJ KUMAR,KOCHI vs. THE PR.CIT, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkeyviswanatha Manoj Kumar Pr. Commissioner Of 39/421, Temple Road Income Tax - 1 Kadavanthara Vs. C.R. Building, I.S. Press Road Ernakulam 682020 Kochi 682018 [Pan:Adwpm1619G] [Appellant] [Respondent] Appellant By: Shri K.M.V. Pandalai, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Prasanth V.K., Cit-Dr

price fixed by the State Government for the purpose of levy of stamp duty, was at Rs.215.21 lakhs, i.e., at Rs.76.03 lacs higher. The provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Act, reading as under, was thus attracted, applicability of which had not been examined by the Assessing Officer (AO) in assessment: Income from other sources

FEDBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2017-18

Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue. 263. (1) The [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner may call for and examine the record of any proceeding under this Act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by the Assessing Officer 89[or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] is erroneous

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated

THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.GRACY BABU, ADOOR P.O.

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

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

revised with an object of reducing the tax litigation. Vide para 3 of the said circular (supra), it is stated that in cases where the tax effect in the appeal to be filed before the Appellate Tribunal does not exceed Rs. 20 lakhs, appeal should not be filed. Thus, taking a note of CBDT Circular No. 03/2018 dated