Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India &Ors.

P Rama Rao, Nawarangpur vs. ITO, Jeypore Ward, Jeypore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri C.M.Garg(Through : Video Conferencing) P.Rama Rao, Vs Cit, Bhubaneswar Prop. Of M/S Om Traders, At-Pathana Street, Po-Nawarangpur, Dist-Nawarangpur-764059 Pan No. : (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Jagamohan Pattanaik, Adv. : राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit, Bhubaneswar U/S.263 Of The Act, Dated 31.03.2004. 2. We Have Heard The Arguments Of Both The Sides & Perused The Relevant Record Of The Tribunal Including The Paper Book Filed By The Assessee Spread Over 77 Pages Along With The Written Submissions Filed On 03.01.2022. 3. Replying To The Above, Ld. Cit-Dr Also Filed Written Submissions & Copies Of The Case Laws/Judgments/Orders In Support Of The Stand Of The Revenue.

…ition to decide the appeal on its own merits having regard to the evidence on record. Such remand orders lead to unnecessary delays and cause prejudice to the revenue. The Supreme Court in the case of Ashwinkumar K Patel vs Upendra J.Patel, reported in (1999) 3 SCC 161, in context with an order of remand passed by the High Court under order 41 Rule 23 of the CPC, observed as under: "The High Court should not ordinarily remand a case under "order 41 Rule 23 CPC to the Lower Court merely because it considers that the reasoning of the lower court, in some respects, was wrong. Such remand orders lead to unnecessary d…

Sri Sukhamaya Das, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicialassessment Year : 2013-14 Sri Sukhmaya Das, Sri Sukhmaya Das, At-N/3/69, Vs. Dcit, Circle -3(1), 3(1), Irc Irc Village, Village, Nayapalli, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Aeppd 2993 A Aeppd 2993 A (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Ar , Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C. Mohanty, Dr Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/05/ 2021 1 Date Of Pronouncement : 14 /06/20 /2021 O R D E R

…ition to decide the appeal on its own merits having regard to the evidence on record. Such remand orders lead to unnecessary delays and cause prejudice to the revenue. The Supreme Court in the case of Ashwinkumar K Patel vs Upendra J.Patel, reported in (1999) 3 SCC 161, in context with an order of remand passed by the High Court under order 41 Rule 23 of the CPC, observed as under: “The High Court should not ordinarily remand a case under “order 41 Rule 23 CPC to the Lower Court merely because it considers that the reasoning of the lower court, in some respects, was wrong. Such remand orders lead to unnecessary d…

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Koundinya Educational Society

Bench: C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

…red to surrender large parcels of land voluntarily, on the pretext of construction of capital city in the pooled land. Therefore, the State and the APCRDA are bound 151 (1998) 1 SCC 226 152 (1984) 3 SCC 161 CJ, MSM,J and DVSS,J W.P.Nos.13203 of 2020 & batch 222 to implement the Amaravati project as notified by the APCRDA and cannot use the land pooled for any other purpose except the purposes specified in the Rules, 2015. By applying the principles laid down in the above judgments, we find that it is appropriate to issue writ of continuo…