ASST. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAMBALPUR vs. SHREE BALAJI ENGICON LIMITED, BELPAHAR RS

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

section 80IA(4) of the Act in respect of Sagar Beena Project." (Emphasis supplied 3.5.2] The Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench 'A' in the case of the ACIT v. M/s JSR Constructions (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898/Bang/2009] has held that: "3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company, engaged in the business of civil engineering works

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

section 80IA(4) of the Act in respect of Sagar Beena Project." (Emphasis supplied 3.5.2] The Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench 'A' in the case of the ACIT v. M/s JSR Constructions (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898/Bang/2009] has held that: "3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company, engaged in the business of civil engineering works

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

section 80IA(4) of the Act in respect of Sagar Beena Project." (Emphasis supplied 3.5.2] The Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench 'A' in the case of the ACIT v. M/s JSR Constructions (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898/Bang/2009] has held that: "3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company, engaged in the business of civil engineering works

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

section 80IA(4) of the Act in respect of Sagar Beena Project." (Emphasis supplied 3.5.2] The Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench 'A' in the case of the ACIT v. M/s JSR Constructions (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898/Bang/2009] has held that: "3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company, engaged in the business of civil engineering works

M/S. SHREE BAALAJI ENGICONS LIMITED,JHARSUGUDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

section 80IA(4) of the Act in respect of Sagar Beena Project." (Emphasis supplied 3.5.2] The Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore Bench 'A' in the case of the ACIT v. M/s JSR Constructions (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 898/Bang/2009] has held that: "3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company, engaged in the business of civil engineering works

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

section 14A r.w.r 8D the maximum equivalent to the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year under consideration. 9. That based on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of interest on TDS of Rs.66,103/- by applying Supreme Court decision in the case of 'Bharat Commerce Industries

ITO, ANGUL WARD, , ANGUL vs. M/S. NCC SMASL JRT(JV),, ANGUL

4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an AOP and was formed as Joint Venture between M/s NCC Limited (NCC), M/s Sainik Mining and Allied Services Limited (SMASL) and M/s Jalram Transport (JRT) to execute the mining works like, OB Removal, loading, transportation and other same kind of related work given by Mahanadi Coalfield Limited

ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL vs. NCC-SMASL-JRT(JV), ANGUL

4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an AOP and was formed as Joint Venture between M/s NCC Limited (NCC), M/s Sainik Mining and Allied Services Limited (SMASL) and M/s Jalram Transport (JRT) to execute the mining works like, OB Removal, loading, transportation and other same kind of related work given by Mahanadi Coalfield Limited

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

4: The AO erred in levying interest under section 234B and C of the Act. Ground No. 5: Even otherwise since the delay in filing Form 10 is condonable one, (vide Board’s Circular No. 273 dt. 3/6/1980) Assessing Officer ought not to have rejected the claim for deduction under section 11(2) without educating the assessee about the remedial

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

4: The AO erred in levying interest under section 234B and C of the Act. Ground No. 5: Even otherwise since the delay in filing Form 10 is condonable one, (vide Board’s Circular No. 273 dt. 3/6/1980) Assessing Officer ought not to have rejected the claim for deduction under section 11(2) without educating the assessee about the remedial

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. GRIDCO LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year :2010-2011 2011 Dcit, Corporate Circle Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Vs. Grid Corporation Of Orissa Grid Corporation Of Orissa Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Ltd., Ltd., Gridco Gridco House, House, Janapath, Bhubaneswar Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.Venugopal Rao /P.Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 9.5.2016 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.0493/14-15 For The Assessment Year Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, Ld Ar Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

TDS u/s.194J on payments to OPTCL, the same is hit by the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. It was the prayer that the order P a g e 4

NISHA DATA COM LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, is illegal, arbitrary and liable to be annulled. 5. For that the disallowance of Rs.24,84,000.00 claimed as business expenditure, has been made under suspicious and frivolous grounds which is illegal and arbitrary and liable to be annulled. 6. For that the CIT(A) without affording adequate opportunity of hearing

NISHA DATA COM LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, is illegal, arbitrary and liable to be annulled. 5. For that the disallowance of Rs.24,84,000.00 claimed as business expenditure, has been made under suspicious and frivolous grounds which is illegal and arbitrary and liable to be annulled. 6. For that the CIT(A) without affording adequate opportunity of hearing

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), CUTTACK vs. MAA TARINI TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED, BARBIL, KEONJHAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.454 & 455/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Income Tax Officer (Tds), Income Tax Officer (Tds), Vs. Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Cuttack Ltd., Ltd., Bhadrasahi, Bhadrasahi, Barbil, Barbil, Keonjhar Pan/Gir No.Aafcm 0416 L No.Aafcm 0416 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench These Two These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 10.9.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018 Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018-19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018 19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018-19 For The Assessment Year Essment Year 2014-15 Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act. Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act.

4. It was submitted by ld Sr DR that section 234E of the Act provides for payment of fee if the assessee fails to deliver the statement as prescribed in Section 200(3) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has every authority to levy fee either by a separate order or while processing the statement under Section 200A

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CUTTACK vs. MAA TARINI TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED, BARBIL KOENJHAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.454 & 455/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Income Tax Officer (Tds), Income Tax Officer (Tds), Vs. Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Cuttack Ltd., Ltd., Bhadrasahi, Bhadrasahi, Barbil, Barbil, Keonjhar Pan/Gir No.Aafcm 0416 L No.Aafcm 0416 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench These Two These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 10.9.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018 Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018-19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018 19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018-19 For The Assessment Year Essment Year 2014-15 Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act. Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act.

4. It was submitted by ld Sr DR that section 234E of the Act provides for payment of fee if the assessee fails to deliver the statement as prescribed in Section 200(3) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has every authority to levy fee either by a separate order or while processing the statement under Section 200A

OMM SHREE REALCON PVT. LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. PR.CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & And Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 Om Shree Realcon Pvt Ltd., Om Shree Realcon Pvt Ltd., Vs. Pr. Cit- Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-1 Plot No.418, Forest Park, 8, Forest Park, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabco 3118 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ca S.K.Sarangi, Ca Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. Cit (Osd) Pr. Cit (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 28 /0 06/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28 /0 /06/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

4 | 31 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sr.No. Name & Opening Credits Payments/ Balance complete balance during Debits as on address of the the year during 31.3.2018 lender the year 6. Copy of challan in respect of payment of TDS of Rs. 98,87,343t- shown payable in the Balance Sheet. 7. Details of immovable properties purchased during F.Y.2017-18 in following format

SAROJ KUMAR SWAIN,KHORDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KHORDA WARD, KHORDA, KHORDA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No. 162/Ctk/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Saroj Kumar Swain Vs Ito, Khurda Ward,Khurda At/P.O:- Banga, Kudiary, Delanga, Jatni, Khurda, 752050 Pan No. : Azlps 4330 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri, S.K. Agrawalla, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

section 69(A) of the Act would result in the assessed income going below the returned income. This admittedly is not permissible. This being so, the AO is directed to assess income of the assessee at the returned of income. The AO is also directed to verify and 4 grant credit to the TDS

M/S. GRID CORPORATION OF ORISSA LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT-(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2009-2010 2010 Grid Corporation Of Orissa Grid Corporation Of Orissa Vs. Acit (Tds), Acit (Tds), Ltd., Ltd., Gridco Gridco House, House, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.Venugopal Rao /P.Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.7.2019 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.0035/17-18 For The Assessment Year The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, Ld Ar Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

4. It was also the submission that a perusal of the provisions of section 244A(2) of the Act clearly provides that the attribution of the delay in granting of the refund to the assessee is to be decided by the Pr. CCIT or the CCIT or the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner. It was the submission that the Assessing