Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat cochin Page 1 of about 502 results (0.212 seconds)

Global Education Net (Genet) Vs. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissoner dated 31-8-2006 passed under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act. 1. The order of the learned Commissoner Kottayam refusing the registration of the appellant trust on the facts and in the circumstances of the case is opposed to law and facts. 2. The learned Commissoner ought to have condoned the delay of the appellant trust in making an application for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act on the premises of its case reported to him. 3. In the alternative, if the Commissoner was not convinced with the appellant's explanations for the delay in making the application for registration and therefore the registration was refused to grant from the date of the creation of the trust, he ought to have granted the registration from the first day of the financial year 2005-06 in which the application was made as provided in Sub-clause (ii) of Clause (a) of Section 12A. 4. Notwithstanding that the Commiss...

Shri N.P. Santhosh Kumar Vs. the Asstt. Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central, Cochin dated 1-2-2007 passed Under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act. 2. The CIT (Central) went wrong in initiating proceedings Under Section 263 and canceling the assessment order in respect of the block assessment Under Section 158BC dated 18/3/2005, alleging that the said order was erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. 3. It is submitted that the direction given by the CIT (Central) to the Assessing Officer "to take suitable action to re-compute the undisclosed income earned by the assessee from "suppression of income from Soda Sales" after verifying the genuineness of the various claims put forward by the assessee before the undersigned vide his written reply dated 10/01/2007", is illegal and unsustainable. 4. The direction of CIT (Central) contained in the order Under Section 263, is to make a roving enquiry which indicates that there is no material for passing the order U...

The Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. State Bank of Travancore

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Tncome-tax (Appeals)-I, Trivandrum dated, 28-4-2005 for the assessment year 2002-03.2. The first issue which arises for our consideration is whether the CIT(Appeals) is justified in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the entire bad debts written off without limiting the amount of deduction to the amount by which it exceeds the credit balance in the provision for bad and doubtful debts, account as a deduction.3. We have heard the parties. The assessee bank has claimed the deduction of Rs. 100,17,62,010/- as bad debts written off while computing its total income. It was noticed by the AO that the assessee has further claimed a sum of Rs. 35,47,29,345/- as a deduction Under Section 36(1)(viia) in respect of the provision for bad and doubtful debts which consisted of Rs. 23,77,20,200/- being 10% of the rural advances and Rs. 11,70,09,145/- being 5% of the gross total income relating to non-rural advan...

Dr. M. Thomas Mathew Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-I, Calicut, dated 26-3-2004 for the assessment year 1998-99, which arises out of the assessment framed under the Gift-tax Act. The assessee has filed concise grounds. The first issue which arises for our consideration is whether the property, which is 33 cents of land transferred by the assessee with the limited right of enjoyment by a deed of Settlement dated 7-10-1997 in favour of his wife is a deemed gift within the meaning of Section 4(1)(d) of the Gift-tax Act?.2. The brief facts relating to this issue can be stated as under: The assessee was owning 33 cents of land, which he transferred to his wife Mrs. Elizabath Mathew, vide deed of Settlement dated 7-10-1997 with a condition that she should construct a residential house out of her own source and to give right of residence to the assessee for him and his two children for life. On the basis of the Settlement deed, the Assessing Officer issued notice...

P.K. Narayanan Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the orders of the CIT(Appeals)-I, Kochi. Originally these appeals were decided by this Tribunal vide common order dated 28-11-1995. At the instance of the revenue, references were made to the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and the Hon'ble High Court disposed off the said references vide common judgment dated 17-9-2004 directing this Tribunal to consider these appeals again taking into consideration the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in assessee's own case reported in 229 ITR 596 and 238 ITR 905. As per the directions of the Hon'ble High Court these appeals were posted for hearing. The only controversy, which is common in all these appeals, is regarding the inclusion of the income derived from the business of M/s. Archana Jewellery in the hands of the assessee.2. Briefly stated facts are as under: The assessee is an abkari contractor and is assessed in the status of Individual. There was a search action under Section...

Peninsular Capital Market Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. In this group of appeals, three appeals are filed by two different assessees and one appeal is filed by the revenue challenging the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals).2. The first issue which arises for our consideration is whether the Commissioner (Appeals) is justified in holding that no depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act can be allowed on the cost of membership card of the Bombay Stock Exchange.3. As far as the assessee Peninsular Capital Market Ltd. is concerned, it is a public limited company engaged in stock broking business. The present issue arises out of the assessment order for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03. The assessee-company acquired the membership card from the Bombay Stock Exchange for which the assessee paid the bid amount of Rs. 2,32,32,321 and claimed depreciation under Section 32 of the Act of Rs. 58,08,080 in the assessment year 2001-02 and Rs. 43,56,060 in the assessment year 2002-03. The assessing officer was of the opinio...

Harrisons Malayalam Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. This group of five appeals are preferred by one and the same assessee and these appeals relate to the assessment years 1995-96 to 1999-2000 respectively. As most of the issues are identical and facts are common, hence these appeals are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.2. We have heard the learned CAs Shri M.K. Ananthanarayanan and Shri P.R. Krishna Kumar for the assessee and the learned Departmental Representative Smt. A.S. Bindhu for the revenue. The assessee has filed paper book along with the written submissions. The learned Departmental Representative. has also filed written submissions. We have carefully considered their arguments as well as the written submissions and now proceed to decide these appeals as under.3. The first issue which arises for our consideration is in respect of addition of the income from value added grades of rubber. This issue had come for the consideration of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 1994-...

The Fertilizers and Chemicals Vs. the Asstt. Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

Reported in : (2007)109ITD56(Coch.)

1. The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-II, Cochin dated 20-9-2004 for the Assessment Year 1996-97. 1. The order of the learned CIT(Appeals) is against law, equity and justice 2. (a) The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of the interest made Under Section 234B(3) beyond the date of payment of tax Under Section 140A of the Act. Levy of interest Under Section 234B(3) is subject to Section 234B(2), hence interest there-under could not be levied beyond the date of payment of tax made Under Section 140A of the Act. (b) Notwithstanding the above, the question involved is a legal issue debatable in nature and hence cannot be made the subject matter of rectification Under Section 154. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in the confirming the order of Assessing Officer in recomputing the deduction Under Section 80HHC, by deducting unabsorbed investment allowance from the income eligible for the purpose of deduction Under Section ...

ito Vs. Pulimoottil Silk House

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

1. The revenue has filed this appeal challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)-II, Kochi dated 17-9-2004 for the assessment year 2001-02. The assessee has also filed cross-objection in this appeal.2. We are taking up the revenue's appeal at the first instance for decision. The first issue which arises for our consideration is whether the Commissioner (Appeals) is justified in deleting the addition made by the assessing officer under Section 43B of the Act in respect of payment of EPF and ESI beyond the due date. It was noticed by the assessing officer that the assessee has not remitted the amount of EPF and ESI within the due date. The assessing officer, therefore, made the disallowance of Rs. 1,42,984 under Section 43B of the Act. The contention of the assessee was that though the said amounts were paid beyond the due date prescribed under the relevant Act, but have been paid well within the due date for filing the return of income. The contention of the assessee was reject...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Norasia Lines (Malta) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin

Reported in : (2007)292ITR31(Coch.)

1. The Cochin Bench of the Tribunal, through a judicial order, recommended that above appeal be heard by a Special Bench. Accordingly, a Special Bench was constituted to hear and dispose of the appeal, in the light of the following question, referred to by the Bench: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, if the non-resident assessee's case is covered under Section 172(1) and subsequently he opted for the assessment to be made of his total income under Section 172(7), whether he is liable for interest to be levied under Sections 234B and 234C, even if the assessment is completed under Section 143(3), in view of the CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2001 dt. 9th July, 2001? 2. The case was fixed and both the parties have been heard. The assessee is a non-resident company incorporated in the Republic of Malta and in the previous year, relevant to asst. yr. 1996-97 was engaged in shipping business in international traffic. Special provisions of Section 172 of the IT Act (hereinafter cal...