Hll Biotech Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Cochin) Conclusion: Since assessee-company was still at the pre-commencement stage and during this phase, it had raised equity funds which was invested in fixed deposits of the Banks as well as the holding company and had earned interest on the same, the interest earned had to be taxed as […]
Cochin International Airport Ltd appeal: The Commissioner is empowered to initiate suo moto proceedings under section 263 where the AO takes a wrong decision
It is not discernable whether the interest paid for the acquisition of the impugned property has been claimed by the assessee under Chapter IVC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, namely ‘income from house property’. If the assessee had already claimed interest under the head income from house property, the same interest cannot be capitalized and added to the cost of acquisition of the property.
An institution registered as a Primary Agricultural Credit Society (PACS) was not entitled to obtain Banking License and, therefore, could not be considered as bank not entitled for deduction under section 80P(2).
Tribunal held that the beneficial shareholders of the lender company are partners of the assessee- firm and therefore the deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) has to be assessed only in the hands of the partners and not in the hands of the assessee- firm.
In an assessee- favor ruling, the Cochin bench of ITAT said that the assessee, a primary agricultural credit society is entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80P (2) of the Income Tax Act, with regard to interest received on deposits made by the assessee with sub treasury.
ITO Vs M/s. Edanad- Kannur SCB Ltd. (ITAT Cochin) The undisputed facts are that the assessees in these cases are all primary agricultural credit society and they are registered as such under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Limited & Ors. (supra) had […]
Sri. P.P.Sharafuddin Vs. ITO (ITAT Cochin) The amount of Rs. 14 lakh was seized by the police from the assessee on 03.03.2008. At the time of seizure, the assessee did not mention that the amount seized belongs to his uncle. Because of the suspicious behavior and lack of explanation on the part of the assessee, […]
George Alexander Vs ACIT (ITAT Cochin) The Assessing Officer in para 6 of the assessment order had catalogued the unexplained deposits in various bank accounts. While working out the unexplained deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee, the Assessing Officer had given due credit to the income declared by the assessee in the return of […]
Reimbursement of expenses against separate bills to C&F agents doesn’t require TDS and hence no dis allowance u/s 40(a)(1a)… ITAT Cochin bench held in the case of St. Mary’s Rubbers dismissing revenue’s appeal
