Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd.

363 ITR 658Supreme Court of India2014#1247 most cited

What is Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. authority for?

The Department has a moral and legal obligation to refund excess tax collected from taxpayers, along with interest. An assessee is entitled to interest on the amount of taxes refunded, including interest on interest, as per Section 244A of the Income-tax Act.

91

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. · interest on refund · Section 244A · interest on interest · excess tax collected · department's obligation · tax refund · Section 244 · Section 243 · 363 ITR 658 · 43 Taxmann.com 240 · 6 SCC 335

Also reported as

43 Taxmann.com 240822 Taxmann 2256 SCC 335

Sections most often in play

Section 244ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 147Section 243Section 244Section 140A(1)Section 244(1A)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 140a(1)section 153a(b)interest on refundinterest on interestsection 140asection 263(2)section 244section 142(2c)section 243section 244asection 140abatement of assessment

Judgments citing Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd.

DCIT, Circle- 2, Intl. Taxation, Dehradun vs. Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd., Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2015-16 is partly allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6173/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 5223/Del/2018 (A. Y.: 2015-16) Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 14Th Floor, Tower-C, Building Circle-2, No. 1, Dlf City, Phase-Ii, International Taxation, Gurgaon Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcs1107J

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mayank Kumar, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 44BSection 9(1)(vii)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN Before Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice President and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No. 5223/Del/2018 (A. Y.: 2015-16) Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 14th Floor, Tower-C, Building Circle-2, No. 1, DLF City, Phase-II, International Taxation, Gurgaon Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADCS1107J ITA No. 5305/Del/2018 (A.Y.: 2015-16) DCIT, Vs. Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd, 14th Floor, Tower-C, Building No. Circle-2, International Taxation, 1, DLF City, Phase-II, Gurgaon Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADCS1107J Assessee by : Shr…

Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Intl. Taxation, Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2015-16 is partly allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6126/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 5223/Del/2018 (A. Y.: 2015-16) Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 14Th Floor, Tower-C, Building Circle-2, No. 1, Dlf City, Phase-Ii, International Taxation, Gurgaon Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcs1107J

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mayank Kumar, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 44BSection 9(1)(vii)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN Before Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice President and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No. 5223/Del/2018 (A. Y.: 2015-16) Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 14th Floor, Tower-C, Building Circle-2, No. 1, DLF City, Phase-II, International Taxation, Gurgaon Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADCS1107J ITA No. 5305/Del/2018 (A.Y.: 2015-16) DCIT, Vs. Schlumberger Asia Services Ltd, 14th Floor, Tower-C, Building No. Circle-2, International Taxation, 1, DLF City, Phase-II, Gurgaon Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADCS1107J Assessee by : Shr…

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Union of Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1817/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon'Ble High Court Of Mumbai?”

Section 244A

…e's own case as well as judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation (supra). 3.9 Before parting with, we are reminded of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 658/822 Taxman 225/43 taxmann.com 240 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed at length about moral and legal obligation of the department to refund the amount of tax collected from the tax payers which was more than the amount actually due as per law, along with interest Some of the useful observations are 4 M/s. Union Bank of India reproduced h…

ACIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1102/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

…'s own case as well as judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation (supra). 3.9 Before parting with, we are reminded of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 658/822 Taxman 225/43 taxmann.com 240 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed at length about moral and legal obligation of the department to refund the amount of tax collected from the tax payers which was more than the amount actually due as per law, along with interest. Some of the useful observations are reproduced hereunder for the sake of b…

ACIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1101/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

…'s own case as well as judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation (supra). 3.9 Before parting with, we are reminded of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 658/822 Taxman 225/43 taxmann.com 240 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed at length about moral and legal obligation of the department to refund the amount of tax collected from the tax payers which was more than the amount actually due as per law, along with interest. Some of the useful observations are reproduced hereunder for the sake of b…

ACIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1100/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

…'s own case as well as judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation (supra). 3.9 Before parting with, we are reminded of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 658/822 Taxman 225/43 taxmann.com 240 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed at length about moral and legal obligation of the department to refund the amount of tax collected from the tax payers which was more than the amount actually due as per law, along with interest. Some of the useful observations are reproduced hereunder for the sake of b…

ACIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1099/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

…'s own case as well as judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation (supra). 3.9 Before parting with, we are reminded of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 658/822 Taxman 225/43 taxmann.com 240 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed at length about moral and legal obligation of the department to refund the amount of tax collected from the tax payers which was more than the amount actually due as per law, along with interest. Some of the useful observations are reproduced hereunder for the sake of b…

ACIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1098/MUM/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

…'s own case as well as judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation (supra). 3.9 Before parting with, we are reminded of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 658/822 Taxman 225/43 taxmann.com 240 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed at length about moral and legal obligation of the department to refund the amount of tax collected from the tax payers which was more than the amount actually due as per law, along with interest. Some of the useful observations are reproduced hereunder for the sake of b…

ACIT-2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1097/MUM/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

…'s own case as well as judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation (supra). 3.9 Before parting with, we are reminded of a recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 658/822 Taxman 225/43 taxmann.com 240 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed at length about moral and legal obligation of the department to refund the amount of tax collected from the tax payers which was more than the amount actually due as per law, along with interest. Some of the useful observations are reproduced hereunder for the sake of b…

Bibhudutta Panda, Bhubaneswar vs. Asst.CIT, Corporate Circle 1(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 81/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla/S.K.Hota, ArsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…ambiguous, then the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver (Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). c) The approval granted under section 153D of the Act by the Supervisory officer (Additional/Jt. CIT) is merely an Administrative order and no civil or penalty consequences flow from such an order against the assessee. The approval of Supervisory officer is totally distinct from the assessment order and not required to be communicated…

Bibhudutta Panda, Bhubaneswar vs. Asst.CIT Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 80/CTK/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla/S.K.Hota, ArsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…ambiguous, then the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver (Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). c) The approval granted under section 153D of the Act by the Supervisory officer (Additional/Jt. CIT) is merely an Administrative order and no civil or penalty consequences flow from such an order against the assessee. The approval of Supervisory officer is totally distinct from the assessment order and not required to be communicated…

Bibhudutta Panda, Bhubaneswar vs. Asst.CIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 79/CTK/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla/S.K.Hota, ArsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…ambiguous, then the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver (Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). c) The approval granted under section 153D of the Act by the Supervisory officer (Additional/Jt. CIT) is merely an Administrative order and no civil or penalty consequences flow from such an order against the assessee. The approval of Supervisory officer is totally distinct from the assessment order and not required to be communicated…

Bibhudutta Panda, Bhubaneswar vs. Asst.CIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 78/CTK/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla/S.K.Hota, ArsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…ambiguous, then the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver (Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). c) The approval granted under section 153D of the Act by the Supervisory officer (Additional/Jt. CIT) is merely an Administrative order and no civil or penalty consequences flow from such an order against the assessee. The approval of Supervisory officer is totally distinct from the assessment order and not required to be communicated…

Bibhudutta Panda, Bhubaneswar vs. Asst.CIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 77/CTK/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla/S.K.Hota, ArsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…ambiguous, then the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver (Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). c) The approval granted under section 153D of the Act by the Supervisory officer (Additional/Jt. CIT) is merely an Administrative order and no civil or penalty consequences flow from such an order against the assessee. The approval of Supervisory officer is totally distinct from the assessment order and not required to be communicated…

Bibhudutta Panda, Bhubaneswar vs. Asst.CIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 76/CTK/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla/S.K.Hota, ArsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…ambiguous, then the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver (Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). c) The approval granted under section 153D of the Act by the Supervisory officer (Additional/Jt. CIT) is merely an Administrative order and no civil or penalty consequences flow from such an order against the assessee. The approval of Supervisory officer is totally distinct from the assessment order and not required to be communicated…

Sujata Panda, Berhampur vs. ACIT, Centaral Circle-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 421/CTK/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack18 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.415 To 421/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2015 10 To 2015-16 Sujata Panda Sujata Panda, The X Ray Vs. Acit, Acit, Central Central Circle Circle-1, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Berhampur- -760001 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Agppp 7126H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.Parida, Ca/C.Parida, /C.Parida, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit , Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/11 11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench These Are Ese Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A) Of The Ld Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar Dated 21.8.2019 21.8.2019 In Appeal No.0760/2016 0760/2016-17, Dated 17.9.2019, Nos. 0765/2016 0765/2016-17, 0769/2016- 17,0775/2016 17,0775/2016-17, 0782/2016-17, Dated 18.9.2019 No. Dated 18.9.2019 No. 0780/2016-17 & 0788/2016-17 17 For The Assessment Years 2009 2009-10 To 2015-16, Respectively. Respectively. 2. S/Shri Shri D.Parida/C. D.Parida/C.Parida, Ld Ars Appeared Appeared For For The The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida, CA/C.ParidaFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 132Section 153BSection 156

…n the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). i.) In the present case, the assessment order is dated 30.12.2016 as per entries in the Demand & Collection Register. There is no evidence that it was antedated. There is no evidence to the effect that such order was not passed on 30.12.2016. There is no evidence that it has been tempered with by the A.O. ii.) It has been dispatched o…

Sujata Panda, Berhampur vs. ACIT, Centaral Circle-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 420/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack18 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.415 To 421/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2015 10 To 2015-16 Sujata Panda Sujata Panda, The X Ray Vs. Acit, Acit, Central Central Circle Circle-1, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Berhampur- -760001 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Agppp 7126H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.Parida, Ca/C.Parida, /C.Parida, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit , Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/11 11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench These Are Ese Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A) Of The Ld Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar Dated 21.8.2019 21.8.2019 In Appeal No.0760/2016 0760/2016-17, Dated 17.9.2019, Nos. 0765/2016 0765/2016-17, 0769/2016- 17,0775/2016 17,0775/2016-17, 0782/2016-17, Dated 18.9.2019 No. Dated 18.9.2019 No. 0780/2016-17 & 0788/2016-17 17 For The Assessment Years 2009 2009-10 To 2015-16, Respectively. Respectively. 2. S/Shri Shri D.Parida/C. D.Parida/C.Parida, Ld Ars Appeared Appeared For For The The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida, CA/C.ParidaFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 132Section 153BSection 156

…n the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). i.) In the present case, the assessment order is dated 30.12.2016 as per entries in the Demand & Collection Register. There is no evidence that it was antedated. There is no evidence to the effect that such order was not passed on 30.12.2016. There is no evidence that it has been tempered with by the A.O. ii.) It has been dispatched o…

Sujata Panda, Berhampur vs. ACIT, Centaral Circle-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 419/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack18 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.415 To 421/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2015 10 To 2015-16 Sujata Panda Sujata Panda, The X Ray Vs. Acit, Acit, Central Central Circle Circle-1, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Berhampur- -760001 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Agppp 7126H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.Parida, Ca/C.Parida, /C.Parida, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit , Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/11 11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench These Are Ese Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A) Of The Ld Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar Dated 21.8.2019 21.8.2019 In Appeal No.0760/2016 0760/2016-17, Dated 17.9.2019, Nos. 0765/2016 0765/2016-17, 0769/2016- 17,0775/2016 17,0775/2016-17, 0782/2016-17, Dated 18.9.2019 No. Dated 18.9.2019 No. 0780/2016-17 & 0788/2016-17 17 For The Assessment Years 2009 2009-10 To 2015-16, Respectively. Respectively. 2. S/Shri Shri D.Parida/C. D.Parida/C.Parida, Ld Ars Appeared Appeared For For The The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida, CA/C.ParidaFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 132Section 153BSection 156

…n the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). i.) In the present case, the assessment order is dated 30.12.2016 as per entries in the Demand & Collection Register. There is no evidence that it was antedated. There is no evidence to the effect that such order was not passed on 30.12.2016. There is no evidence that it has been tempered with by the A.O. ii.) It has been dispatched o…

Sujata Panda, Berhampur vs. ACIT, Centaral Circle-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 417/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack18 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.415 To 421/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2015 10 To 2015-16 Sujata Panda Sujata Panda, The X Ray Vs. Acit, Acit, Central Central Circle Circle-1, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Berhampur- -760001 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Agppp 7126H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.Parida, Ca/C.Parida, /C.Parida, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit , Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/11 11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench These Are Ese Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A) Of The Ld Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar Dated 21.8.2019 21.8.2019 In Appeal No.0760/2016 0760/2016-17, Dated 17.9.2019, Nos. 0765/2016 0765/2016-17, 0769/2016- 17,0775/2016 17,0775/2016-17, 0782/2016-17, Dated 18.9.2019 No. Dated 18.9.2019 No. 0780/2016-17 & 0788/2016-17 17 For The Assessment Years 2009 2009-10 To 2015-16, Respectively. Respectively. 2. S/Shri Shri D.Parida/C. D.Parida/C.Parida, Ld Ars Appeared Appeared For For The The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida, CA/C.ParidaFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 132Section 153BSection 156

…n the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). i.) In the present case, the assessment order is dated 30.12.2016 as per entries in the Demand & Collection Register. There is no evidence that it was antedated. There is no evidence to the effect that such order was not passed on 30.12.2016. There is no evidence that it has been tempered with by the A.O. ii.) It has been dispatched o…

Sujata Panda, Berhampur vs. ACIT, Centaral Circle-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 416/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack18 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.415 To 421/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2015 10 To 2015-16 Sujata Panda Sujata Panda, The X Ray Vs. Acit, Acit, Central Central Circle Circle-1, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Clinic, State Bank Of India, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Berhampur- -760001 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Agppp 7126H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.Parida, Ca/C.Parida, /C.Parida, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit , Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/11 11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/11 11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench These Are Ese Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A) Of The Ld Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar Dated 21.8.2019 21.8.2019 In Appeal No.0760/2016 0760/2016-17, Dated 17.9.2019, Nos. 0765/2016 0765/2016-17, 0769/2016- 17,0775/2016 17,0775/2016-17, 0782/2016-17, Dated 18.9.2019 No. Dated 18.9.2019 No. 0780/2016-17 & 0788/2016-17 17 For The Assessment Years 2009 2009-10 To 2015-16, Respectively. Respectively. 2. S/Shri Shri D.Parida/C. D.Parida/C.Parida, Ld Ars Appeared Appeared For For The The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida, CA/C.ParidaFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 132Section 153BSection 156

…n the Courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law giver as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (363 ITR 658) (para-22). i.) In the present case, the assessment order is dated 30.12.2016 as per entries in the Demand & Collection Register. There is no evidence that it was antedated. There is no evidence to the effect that such order was not passed on 30.12.2016. There is no evidence that it has been tempered with by the A.O. ii.) It has been dispatched o…