ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

RONALD EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

MR. MANOJ KUMAR NAYAK,BHUBANESWAR vs. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

c) TDS-Rs.135546 which are the entries of facts and it is this inconsistency which has been brought to the kind notice of the learned assessing officer as stipulated u/s.154(2) of the Act. 2. That the conduct on the part of the learned assessing officer to call for the original copies of the assessee’s passport, acknowledgement

MGM GREEN ENERGY LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.370/Ctk/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) Mgm Green Energy Limited, Vs Jcit, Range Rourkela, Rourkela 5-A, Forest Park, Bhubaneswar Pan No. :Aahcm 8472 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Sh A.K.Sabat & Sh B.K.Mahapatra, Cas राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1. Bhubaneswar, Dated 11.06.2019, In I.T.Appeal No.0388/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Assessee Has Taken As Many As Six Grounds Of Appeal, Relating To Various Additions/Disallowances Made To The Income Declared By The Assessee & Also Against The Adjustments Made In The Book Profit U/S.115Jb Of The Act. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- I) The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee, Which Is Arbitrary, Erroneous & Bad, Both In The Eyes Of Law. Ii) Disallowance Of Interest Expenses U/S.36(Iii) Of The Act At Rs.1,65,18,400/-; Iii) Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.14A Of The Act/Rule 8D Of It Rules At Rs.2,44,82,488/-; Iv) Addition Of Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.14A At Rs.2,44,82,488/- In The Book Profit As Computed U/S 115Jb; V) Addition/Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.115Jb Of The Act Under The Book Profits; Vi) Disallowance Of Differential Depreciation Of Rs.1,16,63,697/-

c) xxxxxxx; or (d) xxxxxxx; or (e) xxxxxxx; or (f) the amount or amounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which [ section 10 (other than the provisions contained in clause (38) thereof) or [***] section 11 or section 12 apply; or] 31. He thus prayed that the adjustment so made liable to be uphold and he prayed accordingly

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.,SAMBALPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), SAMBALPUR

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

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.174/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015 - 2016) Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Podar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

c) Such assets are used by him for the purpose of his business or profession during the previous year. The applicable rate for depreciation on intangible assets is @25%. Accordingly the assessee has claimed depreciation @25% on addition towards lease hold land made after 01.04.1998. Such depreciation is also certified by the Statutory auditor as allowable depreciation at clause No.18

FAHMIDA INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiait(Ss)A No. A No.69/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year: Year: 2008-2009 It(Ss)A No. A No.50/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year: Year: 2009-2010

10% to 5%, Ground No.3 of the revenue stands dismissed. 18. In Ground Nos.4 & 5, the revenue has challenged the direction of the ld CIT(A) in adopting the total income at Rs.1,54,98,904/- before depreciation. 19. Ld CIT DR submitted that the Assessing Officer had made an assessment of Rs.15,39,73,507/-, which had been reduced

FAHMIDA INTERNATIONAL (P) LIMITED,BHUBANWEAWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiait(Ss)A No. A No.69/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year: Year: 2008-2009 It(Ss)A No. A No.50/Ctk/2013: Assessment Year: Year: 2009-2010

10% to 5%, Ground No.3 of the revenue stands dismissed. 18. In Ground Nos.4 & 5, the revenue has challenged the direction of the ld CIT(A) in adopting the total income at Rs.1,54,98,904/- before depreciation. 19. Ld CIT DR submitted that the Assessing Officer had made an assessment of Rs.15,39,73,507/-, which had been reduced

ACIT, CUTTACK vs. PARADIP PORT TRUST, JAGATSINGHPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

Section 43B would not be applicable in the case of the Govt, of India and as such the liability has not been claimed in the P & L A/c. Similarly the other current liability namely audit fees payable to the C & AG, amounts payable to contractors and other payments were also part of the current liabilities which were explained