GRAM VIKAS,MOHUDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BERHAMPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiagram Vikas, I.T.O., Mohuda, B.O. Narsinghpur, Ganjam, Exemption Ward, Vs. Ganjam-760002 (Odisha) Berhampur. Pan No. Aaajg 0107 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

condone the delay of 559 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. Gram Vikas Vs ITO 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the addition as made in the assessment order was to an extent of Rs. 3,51,46,410/-. It was the submission that on appeal

STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ODISHA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARAD 5(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed and stay petition stands dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwals.P.No.11/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year :2017-18 State Pollution Control Board State Pollution Control Board, Vs. Ito, Ward 5(2), Plot No.A-118, Paribesh Bhawan, 118, Paribesh Bhawan, Bhubaneswar Nilakantha Nagar, Agar, Nayapali, Nayapali, Unit-Vii, Bhubaneswar Neswar Pan/Gir No.Aaals 2490 J Aaals 2490 J (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ca Walla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/10/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/10/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

condonation of delay for not filing of its return of income within the statutory time limit, before the CBDT u/s 119(2)(b) of Income Tax Act, which has expressed provision for admission of claim of any exemption after the expiry of the period specified in the Income Tax Act. 2.4.2 In view of the above, it is humbly submitted

BHAIRABI CLUB AOP,KURUMPADA,HADAPADA,KHORDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2016-17 Bhairabi Club, Kurumpada, Bhairabi Club, Kurumpada, Vs. Cit (A), Nfac, Delhi Cit (A), Nfac, Delhi Po: Hadapada, Dist: Khurda Po: Hadapada, Dist: Khurda Pan/Gir No. No.Aaaab 3606 N (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Adv J.M.Pattnaik, 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

154 of the Act. That it was in this backdrop that the appeal was delayed by 253 days, which was not intentional. This fact has not been found to be false. Consequently, we condone the delay of 253 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. It was submitted by ld AR that for the assessment year

SHRI SIDHARTHA SAHA,SAMBALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialassessment Year : 2021-2022 2022 Saroj Kanta Mohanty Saroj Kanta Mohanty, Plot Vs. Asst. Director Of Income Asst. Director Of Income No.18/08, Mohanty Building, No.18/08, Mohanty Building, Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. Lathia Guda, Near Lathia Guda, Near Block Block Colony, Malkangiri. Colony, Malkangiri. Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Afmpm 8480 K (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/0 05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/0 /05/2024 O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Aga This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Inst The Order Of The Ld Addl.Jcit(A)-1, 1, Jaipur Dated 10.1.2024 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.Addl/Jcit(A)-1 Jaipur/10002/2020 /10002/2020-21 For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 22. .

section 154(8) of the Act shows that the rectification petition should have been disposed of within six months from the end of the month in which the application was received. Admittedly, this has also not been done. This being so, I find that the delay in filing appeal before the ld CIT(A) was not on account

SAROJ KANTA MOHANTY,MALKANGIRI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialassessment Year : 2021-2022 2022 Saroj Kanta Mohanty Saroj Kanta Mohanty, Plot Vs. Asst. Director Of Income Asst. Director Of Income No.18/08, Mohanty Building, No.18/08, Mohanty Building, Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. Lathia Guda, Near Lathia Guda, Near Block Block Colony, Malkangiri. Colony, Malkangiri. Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Afmpm 8480 K (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/0 05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/0 /05/2024 O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Aga This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Inst The Order Of The Ld Addl.Jcit(A)-1, 1, Jaipur Dated 10.1.2024 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.Addl/Jcit(A)-1 Jaipur/10002/2020 /10002/2020-21 For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 22. .

section 154(8) of the Act shows that the rectification petition should have been disposed of within six months from the end of the month in which the application was received. Admittedly, this has also not been done. This being so, I find that the delay in filing appeal before the ld CIT(A) was not on account

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

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

delay should be condoned. 5. Consequent upon the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and after due consideration of the submission of the assessee, the total income of the assessee was computed as Rs.Nil after allowing the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for all the subject assessment years. Copy of the order dated

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE1(1), CUTTACK

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

delay should be condoned. 5. Consequent upon the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and after due consideration of the submission of the assessee, the total income of the assessee was computed as Rs.Nil after allowing the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for all the subject assessment years. Copy of the order dated

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

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

delay should be condoned. 5. Consequent upon the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and after due consideration of the submission of the assessee, the total income of the assessee was computed as Rs.Nil after allowing the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for all the subject assessment years. Copy of the order dated