M/S. BHAGABAN MOHAPATRA CONSTRUCTIONS & ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 152/CTK/2026 Assessment Year : 2010-2011

M/s Bhagaban Mohapatra Vs. Joint Commissioner of Constructions & Engineers Income Tax, Range-1, Private Limited, Cuttack, At- HIG-27, Gourav Vihar, Aayakar Bhawan, At- Paradeep, Bagadia, Dist- Shelter Square, Jagatsinghpur, 754142, Tulasipur, Cuttack – Odisha, Jagatsinghpur 753008, Odisha, Cuttack [PAN: AABCB6339D]

APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Assessee by : Sh. Mohit Sheth, AR Revenue by : Sh. Umakanta Dhrupati, Sr. DR

Date of hearing : 13.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 20.04.2026

O R D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

These appeals filed by the assessee against the orders passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals), Cuttack [hereinafter

2 ITA No. 152/CTK/2026 M/s Bhagaban Mohapatra Constructions & Engineers Private Limited

referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)], dated 27.03.2015, I.T. Appeal No. 288/2013-14 on the following grounds of appeal:

“1. For that, without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the Appellant and without considering the submissions made and evidences produced during course of assessment proceeding as well as hearing of appeal, the orders passed by the learned A.O. as well as by the learned CIT(A) is not just and proper under the facts and in the circumstances of the case as such, the same being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice 2. For that, when the Appellant Company has truly, fully and correctly disclosed the return of income and has made true disclosure of its profit percentage, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact in confirming the estimation of net profit at the rate of 8 percent from the contract works on the turnover and in restricting and estimating the net profit at the rate of 4.5 percent from the sub-contact works on the turnover declared by the Appellant, particularly when, in this line of civil sub-contract business, the profit percentage is very low. The impugned estimation of net profit at the rate of 8 percent on the contract works and at the rate of 4.5 percent on sub- contract works, being highly excessive, illegal and contrary to the facts on record, is not sustainable in the eye of law, hence needs to be reduced to the returned figure declared by the Appellant in the interest of justice 3. For that, when the previous and subsequent years profit percentage declared by the Appellant Company have been accepted by both the learned A.O. as well as by the learned CIT(A), the estimation of net profit at the rate of 8 percent on the contract works and estimation of net profit at the rate of 4.5 percent from the sub-contract works on the turnover declared by the Appellant Company, being highly excessive and not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be reduced to the figure returned in the interest of justice. 4. For that, without considering the past business history of the Appellant Company, the estimation of net profit at the rate of 8 percent on the gross turnover declared from contract works and the estimation of net profit at the rate of 4.5 percent on the gross turnover declared from sub-contract works are not only illegal, but also arbitrary, contrary to the facts on record and being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, the Appellant Company craves leave of this Honourable Tribunal to add, alter, amend, substitute or modify the grounds of appeal taken in the Appeal Memo and tourge other grounds of Appeal, if any, at the time of hearing in the interest of justice and equity.”

3 ITA No. 152/CTK/2026 M/s Bhagaban Mohapatra Constructions & Engineers Private Limited 2. At the outset, we noted that the appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 3850 days without any condonation application/affidavit for explaining the reasonable cause for filing appeal with a delay. Since, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order on 27.03.2015 and the appeal was filed on 13.02.2026 whereas the appeal should have been filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of order. Accordingly, registry has pointed out the delay since there is no any explanation for any sufficient cause for delay in filing appeal. We are not condoning the delay of the appeal of the assessee. Accordingly, we dismissed the appeal of the assessee for not filing the appeal within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order.

4 ITA No. 152/CTK/2026 M/s Bhagaban Mohapatra Constructions & Engineers Private Limited 4. Aggrieved from the above order, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 26.05.2013. Considering the submission of the assessee and relying on the judgment of ITAT, Kolkata Bench in the case of Phoolchand Agarwal and Co. Angul Vs. ITO (ITA No. 182/CTK/2005) for AY 2001-02. He upheld the order of the AO regarding estimate the profit at para 6. The Ld. CIT(A) passed the order on 27.03.2015 and directed to AO to recompute the profit as under:

“6. Respectfully following the order of the Hon’ble ITAT, Cuttack the AO is directed to estimate the net profit @ 8% from the gross works contract business. The Hon’ble ITAT, Cuttack in several cases have been directed the AO to estimate the net profit from sub contract work @ 4.5% of the turnover. The AO is also directed to estimate the net profit from sub contract work @ 4.5% of such turnover. 5. Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT on 13.02.2026 with a delay of 3850 days without any explanation application, application and affidavit for condoning the delay with reasonable cause. Even during the course of hearing, there was no condonation of delay application was filed by the assessee counsel. We gone through Form No. 36 filed by the assessee under the appeal details 3C, date of services are communication of the order mentioned on 09.02.2026 but the assessee has not produced any documents towards date of service or communication of the order after long delay from the date of passing of order from 27.03.2015. Accordingly, we reject the appeal of the assessee.

5 ITA No. 152/CTK/2026 M/s Bhagaban Mohapatra Constructions & Engineers Private Limited 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced on 20.04.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 20.04.2026 AK, Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order

Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches