Search: TDS | BharatTax

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARIPADA, BARIPADA vs. MAYURBHANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, BARIPADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 89/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR/S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

3) of Section 194A was inserted, wherein, it was provided that the provision of section 194A are not applicable to the interest paid by the Co-operative society to member thereof from the requirement of TDS. However, since the assessee is a co- operative bank, therefore, this exemption is not applicable to it. He further stated that from 1.6.2015, this

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARIPADA, BARIPADA vs. MAYURBHANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, BARIPADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 84/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR/S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 40

3) of Section 194A was inserted, wherein, it was provided that the provision of section 194A are not applicable to the interest paid by the Co-operative society to member thereof from the requirement of TDS. However, since the assessee is a co- operative bank, therefore, this exemption is not applicable to it. He further stated that from 1.6.2015, this

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 BARIPADA, BARIPADA vs. MAYURBHANJ CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, BARIPADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 78/CTK/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR/S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 40

3) of Section 194A was inserted, wherein, it was provided that the provision of section 194A are not applicable to the interest paid by the Co-operative society to member thereof from the requirement of TDS. However, since the assessee is a co- operative bank, therefore, this exemption is not applicable to it. He further stated that from 1.6.2015, this

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, BARIPADA, BARIPADA vs. MAYURBHANJ CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, BARIPADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 82/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR/S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 40

3) of Section 194A was inserted, wherein, it was provided that the provision of section 194A are not applicable to the interest paid by the Co-operative society to member thereof from the requirement of TDS. However, since the assessee is a co- operative bank, therefore, this exemption is not applicable to it. He further stated that from 1.6.2015, this

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BARIPADA vs. MAYURBHANJ CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, BARIPADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 62/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR/S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

Section 194ASection 194A(3)Section 40

3) of Section 194A was inserted, wherein, it was provided that the provision of section 194A are not applicable to the interest paid by the Co-operative society to member thereof from the requirement of TDS. However, since the assessee is a co- operative bank, therefore, this exemption is not applicable to it. He further stated that from 1.6.2015, this

SUBHASHREE ENTERPRISES,SAMBALPUR vs. ACIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 378/CTK/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) of the Act and there is existing of oral agreement between the assessee and the truck drivers/owners. He further held that the arguments that in this case truck dalals are engaged and has relied on certain case laws to contend that no TDS was required to be deducted u/s.194C of the Act is an afterthought. He observed

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and that of

ITA 289/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri B.K.MohapatraFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR

Section 195Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 197Section 263Section 40Section 92

TDS u/s.195(1) of the Act by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 8. On appeal, the CIT(A) allowed the deduction by following his order for the assessment year 2009-2010. ITA No. 264/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year : 20 10- 201 1 9. Before us no specific error in the order

M/S. ALTRADE MINERALS PVT. LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 65/CTK/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Altrade Minerals Pvt /S. Altrade Minerals Pvt Vs. Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of Ltd., C/O. Kadmawala & Co., C/O. Kadmawala & Co., Income Tax, Central Circle, Income Tax, Central Circle, C.A., C.A., Budhram Budhram Oram Oram Sambalpur Market, Market, Kachery Kachery Road, Road, Rourkela. Pan/Gir No. No.Aafca 7136 F (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.R.Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/20 024

For Appellant: Shri M.R.Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

13,00,227/- arrived by the AO under section 14A r.w.r 8D(2)(ii) without appreciating the fact that only average value of investments on which exempt income was earned has to be taken in to account for computing disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D(2)(iii), thus assessee prays for fresh computation of disallowance under section 14A r.w.r

REGIONAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/CTK/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Aug 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.94/Ctk/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009 Regional College Of Engineering & Vs. Ito Ward-2(2), Bhubaneswar Management, Plot No.18, Sector-A, Zone-B, Mancheswar Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar-751010 Pan No. : Aaaar 1386 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/08/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Bhubaneswar, Dated 28.12.2015 For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That, The Learned Cit (A) Has Committed Serious Error In Not Allowing The Appeal Of The Appellant Against The Order Of The Learned Ao Passed U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 15.10.2014 . 2. That, The Learned Cit (A) Has Committed Serious Error In Not Accepting That The Denial Of "Emption To A Charitable Trust Granted Registration U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act Is A Mistake Apparent From Record As Envisaged U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That, The Learned Cit (A) Has Committed Serious Error In Holding That The Mistake Of Disallowance For Violation Of Provision Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Income Tax Act Is Not A Mistake Apparent From Record In The Case Of A Charitable Trust Registered U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 28Section 40

3 not a mistake apparent on record. Accordingly, he dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Feeling aggrieved from the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 5. Ld. AR before us submitted that the assessee is not required to deduct TDS because its income is determined/calculated as per Sections

ITO, WARD-2(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. BISWAJIT DAS, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 473/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 10Section 10BSection 2

3) of The Tea Act, 1953, the expressions "manufacturer", "Buyer", "Packet Tea", "Tea Bag",-"Green Tea", "Quick Brewing Black Tea", "Instant Tea" and "Made Tea" have also been distinctly and separately defined. Clause (29BA) was inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.2009 to define the expression "manufacture" as under

BISWAJIT DAS,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 493/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 10Section 10BSection 2

3) of The Tea Act, 1953, the expressions "manufacturer", "Buyer", "Packet Tea", "Tea Bag",-"Green Tea", "Quick Brewing Black Tea", "Instant Tea" and "Made Tea" have also been distinctly and separately defined. Clause (29BA) was inserted in section 2 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.2009 to define the expression "manufacture" as under

M/S. BALASORE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,BALASORE vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 467/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.467/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Balasore Cooperative Bank Vs. Acit, Balasore Circle, Limited, Balasore Bibekananda Marg, Balasore-756001 Pan No. : Aaccb 7823 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,Advs राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 04.08.2017, For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1) That The Order Of The Id. Cit(Appeals) Confirming The Additions & Disallowances Made By The A.O. Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Unjustified & Not In Accordance With Law. 2) That The Addition Of Rs. 36,79,148/- U/S. 40(A)(Ia) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Confirmed By Cit(Appeals) To The Extent Of Rs. 36,30,998/- Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Uncalled For & Not In Accordance With Law & The Same Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(Appeals). 3) That The Disallowance U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of Rs. 36,79,148/- As Detailed Below Is Illegal, Arbitrary & Unjustified & Hence Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(A) As The Genuineness Is Not In Doubt. Non-Deduction Of Tds Is A Separate Issue. A) Commission Payment To Dlds Collection Agents Rs. 33,45,248/- B) Legal Expenses Rs. 2,52,000/- C) Audit Fees Rs. 81,900/-

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,AdvsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 36Section 40Section 43B

13 section (1A) of section 192 shall pay, within the prescribed time, the tax to the credit of the Central Government or as the Board directs.10 (3) Any person deducting any sum on or after the 1st day of April, 2005 in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter or, as the case may be, any person being

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. ORISSA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 61/CTK/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.61/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Vs. M/S Orissa State Civil Bhubaneswar Supplies Corporation Ltd Unit-8,Gopabandhu Nagar Bhubaneswar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Aaaco 2570 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri B. Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CITDR

Section 194CSection 194HSection 40

TDS has not been made as per provisions of a particular section (i.e. 194H) and therefore the disallowance U/s. 40(a)(ia) has been made is not maintainable in the eyes of law." 4.3 I have perused the assessment order and the submissions filed by the appellant during the course of appeal proceedings. The appellant has filed an agreement with

DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR vs. ALLIED INFRA SUPPLIERS, GANJAM

In the result, cross objection of the assessee is partly

ITA 481/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year :2012-2013 C.O.No.42/Ctk/2018

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CIT DR

section 68 cannot be applied to sundry creditors and the assessee cannot be applied to sundry creditors and the assessee cannot be asked to prove the 3 ingredients of cash credits in respect of sundry creditors. The sundry credits have arisen out of transactions with the assessee of supply of goods or services and unless the AO proves that

UTKAL GRAMYA/ GRAMEEN BANK,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

ITA 190/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.190 To 192/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Utkal Gramya/Grameen Bank, Vs. Ito(Tds), Sambalpur Dhanupalli, Dist-Sambalpur-768005 Tan No. : Bbnb 00759 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K.Lenka, DR

Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

13. Ld. AR before us submitted that during the course of proceeding before the ITO(TDS), the assessee submitted the copy of the return of income for the years under consideration of the rent recipient Mr. Bijaya Kumar Mishra, where the rent received was included in the total income of the assessee. However, without considering the submission of the assessee

UTKAL GRAMYA/ GRAMEEN BANK,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

ITA 191/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.190 To 192/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Utkal Gramya/Grameen Bank, Vs. Ito(Tds), Sambalpur Dhanupalli, Dist-Sambalpur-768005 Tan No. : Bbnb 00759 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K.Lenka, DR

Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

13. Ld. AR before us submitted that during the course of proceeding before the ITO(TDS), the assessee submitted the copy of the return of income for the years under consideration of the rent recipient Mr. Bijaya Kumar Mishra, where the rent received was included in the total income of the assessee. However, without considering the submission of the assessee

UTKAL GRAMYA/ GRAMEEN BANK,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO (TDS), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

ITA 192/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.190 To 192/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Utkal Gramya/Grameen Bank, Vs. Ito(Tds), Sambalpur Dhanupalli, Dist-Sambalpur-768005 Tan No. : Bbnb 00759 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka, Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K.Lenka, DR

Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)

13. Ld. AR before us submitted that during the course of proceeding before the ITO(TDS), the assessee submitted the copy of the return of income for the years under consideration of the rent recipient Mr. Bijaya Kumar Mishra, where the rent received was included in the total income of the assessee. However, without considering the submission of the assessee

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, TDS, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 306/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms Soumya Singh & Nirod PatadeFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR

Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 201(3)

TDS in respect of P a g e 4 | 26 ITA Nos.306 t o 3 09 /C TK/201 9 Assessm ent Y ears : 20 09- 201 0 to 20 12- 13 payments. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee requiring to explain as to why tax is not liable to be withheld under section

INDRANI PATNAIK,ROURKELA vs. DCIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 393/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that during the year under consideration, the assessee has shown turnover of Rs.458,16,44,870/- as against turnover shown in the preceding year at Rs.260,77,44,068/. He also observed that the gross profit for the year under consideration was shown

ACIT, RORUKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA vs. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for assessment years 2012-13 &

ITA 389/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,, CIT DR

3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that during the year under consideration, the assessee has shown turnover of Rs.458,16,44,870/- as against turnover shown in the preceding year at Rs.260,77,44,068/. He also observed that the gross profit for the year under consideration was shown