SHISHU ANANTA MAHAVIDYALAYA,KHURDA vs. JCIT(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.201 To 203/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Shishu Ananta Mahavidyalaya, Vs. Jcit(Tds), Bhubaneswar Balipatana, Khurda-752102 Tan No. : Bbns00799 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

set aside the orders of authorities below and cancel the penalty.” 10. On the foregoing discussion, we are of the view that penalty is not leviable in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is not in dispute that assessee deducted TDS and paid to the Department. Therefore, there is no loss

SHISHU ANANTA MAHAVIDYALAYA,KHURDA vs. JCIT(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.201 To 203/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Shishu Ananta Mahavidyalaya, Vs. Jcit(Tds), Bhubaneswar Balipatana, Khurda-752102 Tan No. : Bbns00799 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

set aside the orders of authorities below and cancel the penalty.” 10. On the foregoing discussion, we are of the view that penalty is not leviable in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is not in dispute that assessee deducted TDS and paid to the Department. Therefore, there is no loss

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

loss before depreciation. IN01.04: Large investment in property (Form 26QB) as compared to total income. P a g e 9 | 31 Assessment Year : 2018-19 On going through the submission made by you to the notice u/s.`142(1) dated 1.12.2020, it is seen that the following details ae not yet furnished by you. 1. Copies of returns of income

ARSS INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CORPORATION CIRCLE- 1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-2013

TDS deducted in the interest payment, to which, the assessee furnished certificate from Chartered Accountant in Annexure-A to Form 26A in respect of interest amount during the financial year 2011-12 relevant to assessment year 2012-13, which is not disputed by the lower authorities nor by ld CIT DR. But the short issue which requires our adjudication

SRI JAYANTA KUMAR JENA,CUTTACK vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1), CUTTACK

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

Bench: S/Shri P.M. Jagtap & C.M. Gargassessment Year : 2011-12

TDS but actually the assessee has not debited the same amount in the profit and loss account, which can be emanated from the audited profit and loss account and balance sheet filed before the AO. He submitted that on this ground also, the appeal is liable to be allowed. He submitted that the return income disclosed by the assessee

RIO TINTO ORISSA MINING PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS of Rs.5039/- has been shown. Thus, the assessee having already set up its business in the year 5 1997-98, even if there is no business receipt during the year under consideration, the expense as per its Profit and Loss

GANESH ORES PRIVATE LIMITED,CIVIL TOWNSHIP,ROURKELA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROURKELA CIRCLE,ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.44 & 45 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016 16 & 2016-17

set off of the loss in respect of derivative transaction by treating the same as speculative transaction. It was the submission that for the assessment year 2015-16, the assessee had claimed a loss of Rs.98,04,793/- and for the assessment year 2016-17, the assessee had claimed a loss of Rs.2,01,94,788/-. It was the submission

GANESH ORES PRIVATE LIMITED,CIVIL TOWNSHIP ROURKELA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROURKELA CIRCLE,ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.44 & 45 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016 16 & 2016-17

set off of the loss in respect of derivative transaction by treating the same as speculative transaction. It was the submission that for the assessment year 2015-16, the assessee had claimed a loss of Rs.98,04,793/- and for the assessment year 2016-17, the assessee had claimed a loss of Rs.2,01,94,788/-. It was the submission

M/S. JYOTI CONSTRUCTION,KEONJHAR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.188/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-2012) M/S Jyoti Construction, Barbil, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Keonjhar Sambalpur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfj 8820 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyajit Nanda, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 15.03.2016, Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Sole Substantive Ground Raised By The Assessee That The Order Passed By Ld.Cit Is Without Merit & Does Not Satisfy The Twin Conditions Required Under The Law. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Engaged In Contract Works & Filed The Return Of Income Electronically On 19.10.2011 With Total Income Of Rs.70,67,777/-. Subsequently Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Notices U/S.143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Compliance, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Appeared & Case Was Discussed & Produced Financial Statements. Ld. Ao After Verifying The Various Documents Found That The Assessee Has Not Paid The Statutory Liability Before The Due Date Of Filing Of 2 Return Of Income U/S.139() Of The Act & Disallowed U/S.43B Of The Act

loss account and has not deducted TDS u/s.194H of the Act. Since the AO has not examined these facts, the CIT issued show cause notice and in compliance the assessee filed submissions and explanations on each disputed point of the issues. Prima facie the CIT observed that the AO has not examined the facts in proper perspective before completion

ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. INDIAN METALS & FERRO ALLOYS LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the

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

loss account, tax audit report, copy of original TDS certificate. Again, vide notice dated 22.7.2010, the assessee was required to submit details of commission paid during the year and TDS details thereof, which were filed by the assessee on 11.2.2010. The details of travelling and conveyance, commission under the head other selling expenses” were filed by the assessee vide letter

INDIAN METALS AND FERRO ALLOY LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the

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

loss account, tax audit report, copy of original TDS certificate. Again, vide notice dated 22.7.2010, the assessee was required to submit details of commission paid during the year and TDS details thereof, which were filed by the assessee on 11.2.2010. The details of travelling and conveyance, commission under the head other selling expenses” were filed by the assessee vide letter

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

loss account. He further observed that the assessee has undertaken sub-contract works from M/s ECSB-JSR Constructions (JV) Private Limited and received income of Rs. 26,55,66,961/- (as per the TDS certificates) and has received the remaining balance of Rs.24,16,95,998/- from the other contract works undertaken by the assessee company. He observed that

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

loss account. He further observed that the assessee has undertaken sub-contract works from M/s ECSB-JSR Constructions (JV) Private Limited and received income of Rs. 26,55,66,961/- (as per the TDS certificates) and has received the remaining balance of Rs.24,16,95,998/- from the other contract works undertaken by the assessee company. He observed that

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

loss account. He further observed that the assessee has undertaken sub-contract works from M/s ECSB-JSR Constructions (JV) Private Limited and received income of Rs. 26,55,66,961/- (as per the TDS certificates) and has received the remaining balance of Rs.24,16,95,998/- from the other contract works undertaken by the assessee company. He observed that

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

loss account. He further observed that the assessee has undertaken sub-contract works from M/s ECSB-JSR Constructions (JV) Private Limited and received income of Rs. 26,55,66,961/- (as per the TDS certificates) and has received the remaining balance of Rs.24,16,95,998/- from the other contract works undertaken by the assessee company. He observed that

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

loss account. He further observed that the assessee has undertaken sub-contract works from M/s ECSB-JSR Constructions (JV) Private Limited and received income of Rs. 26,55,66,961/- (as per the TDS certificates) and has received the remaining balance of Rs.24,16,95,998/- from the other contract works undertaken by the assessee company. He observed that

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

loss account. He further observed that the assessee has undertaken sub-contract works from M/s ECSB-JSR Constructions (JV) Private Limited and received income of Rs. 26,55,66,961/- (as per the TDS certificates) and has received the remaining balance of Rs.24,16,95,998/- from the other contract works undertaken by the assessee company. He observed that

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

loss account. He further observed that the assessee has undertaken sub-contract works from M/s ECSB-JSR Constructions (JV) Private Limited and received income of Rs. 26,55,66,961/- (as per the TDS certificates) and has received the remaining balance of Rs.24,16,95,998/- from the other contract works undertaken by the assessee company. He observed that

KALPANA MISHRA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD 5(4), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.491/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs Ito Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Alfpm 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri B.R.Pattnaik, Ca राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.03.2024, Passed By The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1062168195(1) For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds :- 1. Hon'Ble Cit(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Ao Even Though The Learned Ao Has Exceeded His Jurisdiction In A Limited Scrutiny Case Selected Under Cass Only To Examine Whether The Investment & Income Relating To Securities Transactions Are Duly Disclosed Or Not & Added A Sum Of Rs.44,00,000.00 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Obtaining Prior Administrative Approval Of The Concerned Pr. Cit/Cit As Prescribed In Circular F. No. 225/402/2018/Ita.Ii, Dated 28- 11-2018 & Instruction No.5/2016 [F.No.225/269/2015-

loss from such transactions was Rs. 16,88,418.00. 3.1.11. Accordingly, the appellant's ITR neither contained any turnover figure relating to share transactions of the appellant which were settled otherwise than by the actual delivery nor any profit/loss from such activities. 3.1.12 This has resulted in the mismatch of the information uploaded in Form-1 by stock exchanges with