ITO v. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd.

Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (Kiit), Patia vs. CIT (Exemp.) Hyderabad, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2017-18 Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Cit (Exemptions), Cit (Exemptions), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Hyderabad 384, 384, Kiit Kiit Campus Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaatk 3103 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agarwalla, Ar S.K.Agarwalla, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 13 /9 9/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/9 9/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Ag This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Ainst The Order Of The Ld Cit(E), Hyderabad Hyderabad Passed U/S.263 Of The Act Dated Dated 14.3.2022 In Appeal No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021 Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1040690424(1) For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Shri S.K.Agarwala, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri S.K.Agarwala, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri S.K.Agarwala, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

…Commissioner exercised under section 263 fails and the writ petitions do not qualify for admission on the ground of the impugned orders being without jurisdiction". The above findings of Hon'ble Delhi High Court were noted in the case of D. G.Housing Project (343 ITR 329) and it was held in para-14 as under: "14. The aforesaid observations have to be understood in the factual background and matrix involved in the said two cases before the Supreme Court. In the said cases, the Assessing Officer had not conducted any enquiry or examined evidence whatsoever. There was total absence of enquiry or verification. These…

Ravi Metallics Limited, Rourkela vs. Pr.CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaravi Metallics Limited, I/10, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No.Adqps 4031 G ………………Assessee Versus Pr.Cit, Sambalpur ………………..Revenue Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ar For The Assessee Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr For The Revenue Date Of Hearing : 30/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, Passed U/S.263 Of The Act In Case No.Pcit/Sbp/263/26/2018-19, Dated 29.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. Heard On The Question Of Condonation Of Delay 2. On Perusal Of The Record, We Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 686 Days. In This Regard, Ld. Ar Filed An Application Along With Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay, Wherein It Has Been Submitted That The Delay Occurred In Filing The Present Appeal Is Neither Intentional Nor Deliberate But Due To Unfortunate & Unavoidable Circumstances Beyond

…missioner exercised under section 263 fails and the writ petitions do not qualify for admission on the ground of the impugned orders being without jurisdiction". * The above findings of Hon'ble Delhi High Court were noted in the case of D. G. Housing Project (343 ITR 329) and it was held as under in para-14 "14. The aforesaid observations have to be understood in the factual background and matrix involved in the said two cases before the Supreme Court. In the said cases, the Assessing Officer had not conducted any enquiry or examined evidence whatsoever. There was total absence of enquiry or verification. These c…

Mayur Khara, Yavatmal vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Nagpur

In the result, Both the appeals of above mentioned assessee’s are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Above Mentioned Assessees Against Two Different Orders Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Nagpur- 2 Dated 17-02-2017 & 16-02-20217 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Respectively. The Grounds Of Raised By The Above Mentioned Assessees Are As Under:-

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The PCIT Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) PAN No.:ABWPK 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The PCIT Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) PAN No.:ABWPK 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri Mahavir Atal, CA Revenue by :Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. Both these appeals have been filed by t…

Dhaneswar Rath Institute of Engineering and Medical Sciences, Cuttack vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed

…ent Year : 2016-17 all the returns of income were available in the income tax portal to disallow the depreciation. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: i) DIT vs Jyoti Foundation, 357 ITR 388 (Del) ii) ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd., 343 ITR 329 (Del) iii) Pr. CIT vs Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt Ltd., 38 ITR 8(Del) iv) ITAT Cuttack in the case of Sangram Keshari Samantaray vs Pr. CIT in ITA No.12/CTK/2020 order dated 28.10.2021 11. Ld A.R. vehemently pointed out that in the notice u/s.263(1) of the Act and in the impugned order u/s.263 of the Act, the CIT (E) incorrectly noted that t…

M/S S A Engineering Works vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-Xvi, Kolka

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…a possibility of understatement of the closing stock. Thus, we are satisfied that the tribunal rightly interfered with the order passed by the CIT and allowed the appeal of the assessee. 2 [2012] 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITA NO. 31 OF 2015 REPORTABLE Page 7 of 7 10. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ.) I Agree (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) (P.A – SACHIN)…