WOMEN ORGANISATION FOR SOCIO CULTURAL AWARNESS,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,EXEMPTIONS, CUTTACK

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

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

250 of the IT Act for hearing in the appeal was issued to which the assessee requested to keep the matter in abeyance till disposal of the application for condonation of delay by the Commissioner I.T.A. No.: 67/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Women Organisation for Socio Cultural Awareness. (Exemptions), Hyderabad. But the ADDL/JCIT(A)-9, Mumbai passed Order dated

KAPILDEV DUBEY,MAYURBHANJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2,BARIPADA, MAYURBHANJ

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2017-18, dated 24.07.2023, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 30.12.2019. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: “1. For that

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

condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and restored the matter for fresh adjudication.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["147", "148", "142(1)", "144", "144B", "69A", "250

MR. NARENDRA KUMA RBAL,KEONJHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KEONJHAR WARD, KEONJHAR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “A. For that, the order of the forums below are illegal absurd, improper and excessive in the facts and circumstances of the case, hence the orders passed are liable to be deleted. B. For that

DREAM INDIA TRANSFORMATION,NABARANGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, BERHAMPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present appeal arises from the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax 3 Dream India Transformation Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order dated 31.10.2023. 2.1 In this case

JEEVAN KALYANA SADHANA KENDRA,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, SAMBALPUR

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

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2023-24 dated 30.01.2025, which has been passed against the intimation order u/s 143(1) of the Act, dated 13.12.2024. I.T.A. No.: 195/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jeevan Kalyana Sadhana Kendra. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds

PRAMOD KUMAR SAHOO,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,KEONJHAR WARD, , KEONJHAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Ld. Ao There Was Absolutely No Response To Notices Fixing The Dates For Hearing After The Proceedings Had Been Initiated U/S 147 Of The Act. Thereafter, The Ld. Ao Proceeded To Add Rs. 12,00,000/- On Account Of Expenditure From Unknown Sources Incurred In The Marriage Ceremony Of The Assesses Daughter.

1. The present appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A)-11, Mumbai [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 07.01.2025 for AY 2011-12, against the order passed by the Ld. AO. It is seen that before

ODISHA INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION(IDCO),BHUBANESWAR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.365/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) M/S Odisha Industrial Infrastructure Vs Dcit, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar Development Corporation, Idco Tower, Janpath, Bhubaneswar Pan No. : Aaaat 2619 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bibekananda Mohanty, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/11/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 25.05.2023, Passed In Appeal No.Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2/10971/2017-18 Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1053183739(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. On Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Filed Belatedly By 409 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Application Along With Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay In Filing The Present Appeal. The Contents Of The Affidavit Filed By The Assessee Are As Under :-

delay in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is heard finally. 5. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- 1. That, the assessment order U/s 143(3) read with 144B and U/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is against law, weight of evidences and probabilities of the case. 2. The appellant being

KAMYAB EXPORTS (P) LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.538 & 539/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year 2009-10 Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Dcit, Corporate Circle No.301, No.301, Royal Royal Height Height Bhubaneswar Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Vihar, , Bhubaneswar , Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No.Aacck 5144 N .Aacck 5144 N (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty , Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

250 of the Act. ITA No.539/CTK/2014 is an 539/CTK/2014 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), dated 15.3.2024 in the matter of penalty under section 271(1

KAMYAB EXPORTS (P) LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.538 & 539/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year 2009-10 Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Dcit, Corporate Circle No.301, No.301, Royal Royal Height Height Bhubaneswar Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Vihar, , Bhubaneswar , Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No.Aacck 5144 N .Aacck 5144 N (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty , Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

250 of the Act. ITA No.539/CTK/2014 is an 539/CTK/2014 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), dated 15.3.2024 in the matter of penalty under section 271(1

BISWAJIT NAYAK,ROURKELA, ODISHA vs. ACIT, ROURKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.19/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Biswajit Nayak, Vs Acit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Qtr.No.B-174, Sector-1, Rourkela-769008 Pan No. :Aaqpn 2087 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/05/2024

condone the delay of 414 days in filing the present appeal and the appeal of the assessee is disposed of on merits. 2 3. Before us, the assessee has taken three grounds of appeal, which are related to the confirmation of the imposition of penalty of Rs.14,21,784/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. Since all the ground pertain

URMILA KISHAN,ANGUL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 250 on dated 22/02/2024 The delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 2 I am an illiterate individual engaged in the business of wholesale and retail trading of Petrol and Diesel and has minimal knowledge of taxation laws and procedures. Due to My Lack of Knowledge

SADHANA FOUNDATION,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

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

Condonation of petition and affidavit filed in support thereof. Therefore the impugned order is illegal and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 5. For that Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal simply appreciating the technicality and not appreciating the merits of the case. Therefore, the impugned order passed by violating provisions of sec 250(4) & (6) is illegal

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JHARSUGUDA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, JHARSUGUDA vs. HIRAKHAND TRANSPORT AND MULTI PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., BRAJARAJ NAGAR

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.282/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Vs Hirakhand Transport & Multi Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q & प्रत्याक्षेऩ सं/Cross Objection No.04/Ctk/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.282/Ctk/2024) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Hirakhand Transport & Multi Vs Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Agrawala, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/09/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15.05.2024, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1064895008(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

250 issued by the Ld. CIT (Appeal) is arbitrary, illegal and bad in law. 3 & CO No.04/CTK/2024 JURISDICTIONAL GROUNDS 3. On the facts and circumstance of case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC has erred in exceeding it's Jurisdiction as provided under section 251(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 while enhancing the income

M/S. NORTH ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ODISHA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well

M/S. WESTERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ORISSA LTD.,SAMBALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ODISHA LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well

WESTERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ORISSA LTD.,SAMBALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well