JM MINING AND TRADING PVT. LTD,TULSIPUR, CUTTACK vs. A.C.I.T CIRCLE2(1), CUTTACK CIRCLE, CUTTACK, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SHELTER CHOWK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.36 & 37/Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011 11 & 2011-12 Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-2(1), Ltd., Ltd., At At-Madhusudan Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aabcj 2946 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/0 07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/0 /07/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

reopened \1/s.147 of the Act. As a result for the Ay- 2008-09 to 2010-11 the assessments were completed u/s.14 7 /144 of the Act in substantive manner and for the impugned A/Y 2010-11 and 2011-12 the appellant company JMMTPL in the protective manner, for which the appellant has taken specific grounds in the present appeals

JM MINING AND TRADING PVT. LTD.,TULSIPUR, CUTTACK vs. A.C.I.T, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SHELTER CHOWK, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.36 & 37/Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011 11 & 2011-12 Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-2(1), Ltd., Ltd., At At-Madhusudan Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aabcj 2946 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/0 07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/0 /07/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

reopened \1/s.147 of the Act. As a result for the Ay- 2008-09 to 2010-11 the assessments were completed u/s.14 7 /144 of the Act in substantive manner and for the impugned A/Y 2010-11 and 2011-12 the appellant company JMMTPL in the protective manner, for which the appellant has taken specific grounds in the present appeals

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeal for hearing.\n3. As the facts and circumstances are similar in ITA Nos. 179 &\n181/CTK/2020, hence, for brevity we will take ITA No.179/CTK/2020\nfor A.Y. 2009-10 and decide the issues accordingly.\nΑ.Υ. 2009-10\nITA No. 179/CTK/2020\n4. The first issue raised by the Revenue in ground

KALINGA MINING CORPORATION,CUTTACK vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay of 2761 days in filing the present appeals and both the appeals of the assessee are heard on merits. 3. As the issues involved in both the years under appeal are common and the grounds taken by the assessee are also similar, therefore, both the appeals are decided together. For the sake of convenience, facts and grounds

KALINGA MINING CORPORATION,CUTTACK vs. A.C.I.T, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay of 2761 days in filing the present appeals and both the appeals of the assessee are heard on merits. 3. As the issues involved in both the years under appeal are common and the grounds taken by the assessee are also similar, therefore, both the appeals are decided together. For the sake of convenience, facts and grounds

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

condone\nthe delay and admit the appeal for hearing.\n3. As the facts and circumstances are similar in ITA Nos. 179 &\n181/CTK/2020, hence, for brevity we will take ITA No.179/CTK/2020\nfor A.Y. 2009-10 and decide the issues accordingly.\nΑ.Υ. 2009-10\nITA No. 179/СТК/2020\n4. The first issue raised by the Revenue in ground

MGM MINERALS LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2009-10 Mgm Minerals Limited., 65, Mgm Minerals Limited., 65, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Forest Park, Bhubaneswar Forest Park, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. No.Aadcm 2818 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri B.K.Mahapatra/A.K.Sabat, /A.K.Sabat, Cas Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 5/9/ /2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 5/9 /9/2024 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), Nfac, Delhi Dated Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 14.6.2023 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Cit(A), Bhubaneswar- 1/10090/2016 /2016-17 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. S/Shri B.K.Mahapatra/A.K.Sabat, S/Shri B.K.Mahapatra/A.K.Sabat, Ld Ars Appeared For Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Sanjay Kumar, Ld Cit Sanjay Kumar, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

condone the delay of 292 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed order exparte without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ld AR also submitted that assessment has been completed u/s.143(3)/147 and the issue of notice including in view of the reasons

KARANI DAN CHANDAK,JAJPUR ROAD vs. AO, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri R.K.Pandaassessment Year : 2017-18 Karani Dan Chandak, Prop. M/S. Vs. Addl.Joint/Dy.Asst.Commssioner Chandan Zarda Store, Jajpur Of Income Tax, Nfac, Delhi Road, Jajpur Pan/Gir No.Aeppc 8155 H (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/05/2024 O R D E R Per R.K.Panda

reopened the assessment u/s.147 of the Act by recording the following reasons as mentioned in the assessment order :- "The assessee individual has furnished the return of income electronically for the A. Y. 2017-18 on 07.11.2017 disclosing total income at Rs.7,41,6101-. No regular assessment has been made in this case. 1. The assessee's name has been flagged

M/S. VINAYAK AGRO INDUSTRIES,ROURKELA vs. ITO WARD-4, ROURKELA

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

delay of 9 days each in the present appeals are condoned and both the appeals are disposed off on merits. 3. It was submitted by the ld. AR that there was a search in the premises of the assessee by the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Regional Unit, Rourkela on 03.08.2012. In the course of search, one laptop

M/S. VINAYAK AGRO INDUSTRIES,ROURKELA vs. ITO WARD-4, ROURKELA

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

delay of 9 days each in the present appeals are condoned and both the appeals are disposed off on merits. 3. It was submitted by the ld. AR that there was a search in the premises of the assessee by the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Regional Unit, Rourkela on 03.08.2012. In the course of search, one laptop

BARUAN SERVICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAJPUR WARD, JAJPUR, JAJPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical\npurposes

Assessment Year: 2019-20\n2. The appeal is time barred by 1 day. The assessee has filed\ncondonation petition dated supported by an affidavit stating the reasons for\nnot filing the appeal within the date. Considering that there is only 1 day\ndelay in filing the appeal, we condone the delay of 1 days and admit the\nappeal for hearing

SULTAN ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,,SUNDARPADA, BHUBANESWAR vs. PR. CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & And Ramit Kocharassessment Year : 2015-16 Sultan Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Sultan Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Vs. Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar-1 At:Plot No.161, Azad Nagar, At:Plot No.161, Azad Nagar, Sundarpada, Bhubaneswar. Sundarpada, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aascs 1016 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent)

condone the delay . It is already conceded by ld. Sr. Advocate representing assessee that the assessee does not have any case on the merits of the issue raised by ld. PCIT in his revisionary order dated 18.03.2021 passed u/s 263 of the 1961 Act. The only surving issue before me is the limitation for invoking the provisions of Section

SANKAR PAIKARAY,BALUGAON vs. I.T.O. KHURDA WARD, KHURDA

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

reopening is also quashed. 11. In the result, appeals of the assessee for four assessment years stand allowed. P a g e 13 | 15 ITA No.365/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2010-2011 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2011-2012 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2012-2013 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2013-2014 ITA No.372/CTK/2023: Assessment

SANKAR PAIKARAY,BALUGAON vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NFAC

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

reopening is also quashed. 11. In the result, appeals of the assessee for four assessment years stand allowed. P a g e 13 | 15 ITA No.365/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2010-2011 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2011-2012 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2012-2013 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2013-2014 ITA No.372/CTK/2023: Assessment

SANKAR PAIKARAY,BALUGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

reopening is also quashed. 11. In the result, appeals of the assessee for four assessment years stand allowed. P a g e 13 | 15 ITA No.365/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2010-2011 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2011-2012 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2012-2013 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2013-2014 ITA No.372/CTK/2023: Assessment

SANKAR PAIKARAY,BALUGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

reopening is also quashed. 11. In the result, appeals of the assessee for four assessment years stand allowed. P a g e 13 | 15 ITA No.365/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2010-2011 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2011-2012 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2012-2013 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2013-2014 ITA No.372/CTK/2023: Assessment

SANKAR PAIKARAY,BALUGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA, KHURDA

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

reopening is also quashed. 11. In the result, appeals of the assessee for four assessment years stand allowed. P a g e 13 | 15 ITA No.365/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2010-2011 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2011-2012 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2012-2013 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Yea r-2013-2014 ITA No.372/CTK/2023: Assessment

SAROJIN SATPATHY,BHUBANESWAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), BHUBANESWARW, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2017-18 Sarojini Sarojini Satpathy, Satpathy, At:N At:N- Vs. Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of 3/455, Irc Village, Po/Ps: 3/455, Irc Village, Po/Ps: Income Income Tax, Tax, Circle Circle-5(1), Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. No.Asgps 9377 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/8 8/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/8 /8/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal of the assessee disposed of on merits. 4. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee had filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year on 25.9.2017. It was the submission that without processing the said return filed, the Assessing Officer had initiated the proceedings