The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Swapna Lahari Pvt Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

Commissioner of Income TAx-II, Hyderabad vs. M/s. Sri Balaji Bio MAss Power Pvt. Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

The Commissioner of Income Tax -1 vs. Harmahendar Singh Bagga

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. The Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

M/s Modi Builders AND Realtors (P) Ltd., vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income tax,

The appeals are disposed of

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

58,084/- from 1st April, 1995 upto the date of refund/payment. Rs.3,57,302/- from 1st April, 1997 upto the date of refund/payment and Rs.96,258/- from 1st June, 1999 upto the date of refund/payment. Interest, it is claimed, is payable under Section 244A of the Act. 4. The contention of the Revenue is that this would amount to paying

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, vs. M/S. SAVIJANA SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

4. The Assessing Officer („AO‟) who picked up for scrutiny the Assessee‟s return for AY 1995-96 by an order-sheet entry dated 5th December 1997 required the Assessee to give the full details and addresses of the persons to whom the aforementioned compensation amounts were paid. The Assessee was asked to explain why the said amounts should

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Kokivenkateswara Reddy AND others,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

4. The Assessing Officer („AO‟) who picked up for scrutiny the Assessee‟s return for AY 1995-96 by an order-sheet entry dated 5th December 1997 required the Assessee to give the full details and addresses of the persons to whom the aforementioned compensation amounts were paid. The Assessee was asked to explain why the said amounts should

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Vishwas Investments Pvt.Ltd,

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 40(a) (ia) of the Act. Further issue may also arise whether the payees had made payments of the TDS to the credit of the government or not. The Tribunal would, therefore, decide the case on merits in view of the law laid down by us in P.M.S. Diesels Vs Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar’s case (supra

The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, vs. M/s. Prasad Film Laboratories Ltd.,

Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenges the award dated 19th December, 2011 passed by the Learned Sole Arbitrator. 2. The Petitioner – Food Corporation of India (hereinafter, ‘FCI’) and M/s Shankar Rice and General Mills (hereinafter ‘miller’) had entered into two milling agreements dated 8th November, 1994 and 15th November, 1994. Under the said contracts, the miller

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s Polisetty Somasundaram,

4) No evidence was furnished to prove the genuineness of advances of Rs.10,66,96,566/- from customers, as such out of the said amount, an amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/- was added to the returned income of the assessee as income from undisclosed sources. (5) Addition of Rs.60,000/- on account of interest charged on investment in shares