TAPAN KUMAR SETHY,CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), CUTTACK

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

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Tapan Kumar Sethy Vs. Ito, Ward-2(4), Purighat Road, Telenga Bazar , Cuttack Cuttack- 753009 Pan/Gir No. Blzps 1048 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhanshu Kr Das, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 15/06/2022 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Cuttack/10917/2019-20 Passed For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 952 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petition Dated 7.4.2025 Supported With Affidavit Stating The Reasons That Due To Serious Illness Of The Assessee’S Mother & Change Of P A G E 1 | 5 Assessment Year : 2017-18

02 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFC), New Delhi NFAC), Delhi dated 15/06/2022 in Appeal No.CIT(A), Cuttack/10917/2019-20 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The appeal is time barred by 952 days

SATE BANK OF INDIA OFFICERS MULTI PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ORISSA LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

condone the delay of 02 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 4. It was submitted by the Id. AR that the quantum addition for the A.Y. 2019- 20 in ITA No. 543/Ctk/2025 by an order dated 04/12/2025 has been restored by the Tribunal to the file of the Assessing

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

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar

02,93,830/- after making addition of Rs.7,00,66,643/- on account of unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act and Rs.2,27,187/- on account of income from other sources. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Id CIT(A) with a delay of 233 days. Before the Id CIT(A), it was submitted

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

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal and thereby sustaining the addition of Rs.3,02,93,425/- made by the AO u/s.69A of the Act being unexplained cash deposit in the bank account during the year. 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income for the impugned

M/S. PASUPATI BREEDING FARM PVT. LTD.,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

condone the delay of 525 days in filing all the present appeals before the Tribunal and admit all the appeals for adjudication. 4. The sole issue raised in all the appeals is against the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB of the Act by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). 5. The AO in case of all the assessees under

M/S. PRAGATI MILK PRODUCT PVT. LTD.,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

condone the delay of 525 days in filing all the present appeals before the Tribunal and admit all the appeals for adjudication. 4. The sole issue raised in all the appeals is against the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB of the Act by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). 5. The AO in case of all the assessees under

M/S. PRAMOD KUMAR ROUT,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

condone the delay of 525 days in filing all the present appeals before the Tribunal and admit all the appeals for adjudication. 4. The sole issue raised in all the appeals is against the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB of the Act by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). 5. The AO in case of all the assessees under

M/S. PRAKASH KUMAR ROUT,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

condone the delay of 525 days in filing all the present appeals before the Tribunal and admit all the appeals for adjudication. 4. The sole issue raised in all the appeals is against the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB of the Act by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). 5. The AO in case of all the assessees under

M/S. PRAKASH KUMAR ROUT,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

condone the delay of 525 days in filing all the present appeals before the Tribunal and admit all the appeals for adjudication. 4. The sole issue raised in all the appeals is against the levy of penalty u/s.271AAB of the Act by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). 5. The AO in case of all the assessees under

INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer, Exemption Indira Gandhi Institute Of Ward, Bhubaneswar, Pharmaceutical Sciences Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Third N-4/208 Nayapalli, Irc Village, Floor, Regional Telecom Trg Vs. Khorda, Odisha-751015 Centre, Vss Nagar Road, Bhubaneswar-751007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati7724B Assessee By : Shri Kc Jena, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

02. Shri KG Jena represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty represented on behalf of the Revenue. 03. The appeal of the assessee is time barred by 185 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay of filing the appeal

M/S. ORISSA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, ITA No.335/CTK/2017 is allowed and ITA

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Cit(Exemptions), Barabati Stadium,Cuttack-753001, Hyderabad Odisha, Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F & Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Barabati Stadium, Cuttack Cuttack-753001, Odisha Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan & D.Das, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Saad Kidwai, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/12/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am:

condonation of delay) is enclosed at page nos. 02 to,03 of the paper book. However no Order U/S 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed by the competent income tax authority either refusing or allowing registration to the appellant as a trust even though several years had passed after receipt of the application for registration

M/S. EXIM INDIA OIL COMPANY LTD,CUTTACK vs. DCIT, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 1998-99 M/S. Exim India Oil Company M/S. Exim India Oil Company Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Ltd., At:N.H-5, Tiberwal Nagar, 5, Tiberwal Nagar, Cuttack Jagatpur, Cuttack Jagatpur, Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aaace 3929 K (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.K. Tiberwal Tiberwal, Md Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit ( Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 8/6/ 20 / 2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 8 /6 6/2022 O R D E R

condone the delay of 1400 days and admit the appeal for hearing on merit. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds: “1.That the order passed by the Learned C.I.T.(A) is without proper appreciation of fact and application of mind, contrary to weight of evidence, contrary to settled law and without carrying out this Hon'ble Bench observation, therefore

BHAVENDRA HASMUKHLAL PATADIA. LEGAL HEIR OF HASMUKHLAL PATADIA.,CUTTACK vs. ITO WARD-!(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.125/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Bhavendra Hasmukhlal Patadia, Vs Ito, Ward-1(1), Cuttack Legal Heir Of Hasmukhlal Patadia, Nayabazar, Chauliaganj, Cuttack-753004 Pan No. :Adapp 6256 G (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/12/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Pr.Cit, Cuttack, Passed In Itba/Com/F/17/2019-20/1026790827(1), Dated 19.03.2020, For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. Head On The Question Of Condonation Of Delay 2. On Perusal Of The Appeal Record, It Is Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 784 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Dated 11.07.2022 Along With Affidavit Stating Therein That Due To Continuous Lockdown On Account Of Spread Of Covid-19, The Assessee Could Not File The Present Appeal In Time, Therefore, He Prayed That Delay Of 784 Days In Filing The Present Appeal May Kindly Be Condoned. On The Other Hand, Ld. Cit-Dr Did Not Object To The Above Submission Of The Ld. Ar. Considering The Above, We Condone

condone 2 the delay of 784 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee and appeal is heard finally. 3. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is an individual, who derives income from letting out of house property and income from share transaction. The assessee had filed its return of income

ORISSA ROAD SAFETY SOCIETY,CUTTACK vs. ITO,EXEMPTION, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

02. Shri Natabar Panda represented on behalf the assessee and Shri Nishanth Rao B represented on behalf of the Revenue. 03. The appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 108 & 109/CTK/2025 are time barred by 45 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay

ORISSA ROAD SAFETY SOCIETY,CUTTACK vs. ITO EXEMPTION,CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

02. Shri Natabar Panda represented on behalf the assessee and Shri Nishanth Rao B represented on behalf of the Revenue. 03. The appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 108 & 109/CTK/2025 are time barred by 45 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay

ORISSA ROAD SAFETY SOCIETY,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

02. Shri Natabar Panda represented on behalf the assessee and Shri Nishanth Rao B represented on behalf of the Revenue. 03. The appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 108 & 109/CTK/2025 are time barred by 45 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay

ORISSA ROAD SAFETY SOCIETY,CUTTACK vs. ITO EXEMPTION,CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

02. Shri Natabar Panda represented on behalf the assessee and Shri Nishanth Rao B represented on behalf of the Revenue. 03. The appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 108 & 109/CTK/2025 are time barred by 45 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay

ORISSA ROAD SAFETY SOCIETY,CUTTACK vs. ITO EXEMPTION,CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

02. Shri Natabar Panda represented on behalf the assessee and Shri Nishanth Rao B represented on behalf of the Revenue. 03. The appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 108 & 109/CTK/2025 are time barred by 45 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay