ITAT Cuttack Judgments — December 2023

M/S. SUPRATIVA,CUTTACK vs ITO WARD-2(2), CUTTACK

ITA 308/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed7 Dec 2023AY 2017-18Allowed

The Tribunal held that the intimation under section 143(1) was issued in violation of the proviso to Section 143(1) as no show cause notice was issued to the assessee. Therefore, the adjustments made without a show cause notice were not permissible.

ITO, WARD-1(1), CUTTACK vs ASHOK SULTANIA, CUTTACK

ITA 305/CTK/2023[2010-11]Status: Disposed4 Dec 2023AY 2010-11Dismissed

The Tribunal found that the tax effect was below the prescribed limit of Rs. 50 lakhs as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue deserved to be dismissed.

MITA MOHANTY,BHUBANESWAR vs DCIT 2(1),BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

ITA 272/CTK/2023[2018-19]Status: Disposed1 Dec 2023AY 2018-19Partly Allowed

The Tribunal found that the assessee had produced bills and vouchers before the Assessing Officer. While acknowledging that 1/5th of the expenses were self-made cash vouchers, the Tribunal restricted the disallowance to this portion.

HANUMAN KHEDARIA HUF,ROURKELA vs ITO WARD 2, ROURKELA, ROURKELA

ITA 275/CTK/2023[ASST. YEAR 2014-15]Status: Disposed1 Dec 2023Allowed

The Tribunal held that denying the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine the statement of the entry operator violated principles of natural justice. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence of the share transactions and allowed the claim for loss.

JEWELS INTERNATIONAL,BHUBANESWAR vs DCIT, BHUBANESWAR

ITA 77/CTK/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed1 Dec 2023AY 2016-17Allowed

The tribunal held that the intimation under Section 143(1) was issued without the mandatory show cause notice as required by the proviso to Section 143(1). Therefore, the intimation was quashed.

JEWELS INTERNATIONAL,BHUBANESWAR vs ITO EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

ITA 81/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: Disposed1 Dec 2023AY 2015-16Allowed

The Tribunal held that the intimation under Section 143(1) was issued without the mandatory show cause notice required by the proviso to Section 143(1). Therefore, the intimation was quashed.