OMM SHREE REALCON PVT. LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. PR.CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & And Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 Om Shree Realcon Pvt Ltd., Om Shree Realcon Pvt Ltd., Vs. Pr. Cit- Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-1 Plot No.418, Forest Park, 8, Forest Park, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabco 3118 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ca S.K.Sarangi, Ca Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. Cit (Osd) Pr. Cit (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 28 /0 06/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28 /0 /06/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

31 Assessment Year : 2018-19 of the revenue on this issue. In regard to second issue being the non- application of provisions of section 68 of the Act in respect of the unsecured loans taken by the assessee, it was submitted that these loans were the same amounts which have been treated by the Pr. CIT as being liable

M/S. GRID CORPORATION OF ORISSA LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT-(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2009-2010 2010 Grid Corporation Of Orissa Grid Corporation Of Orissa Vs. Acit (Tds), Acit (Tds), Ltd., Ltd., Gridco Gridco House, House, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.Venugopal Rao /P.Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 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)-1, Bhubaneswar, 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.7.2019 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.0035/17-18 For The Assessment Year The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, Ld Ar Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

depreciation was allowed overlooking section 8OVVA of the Act. Overlooking of a statutory provision is clearly a mistake apparent on record and on that basis, rectification under section 154 of the Act was clearly admissible. Impermissibility of deduction is not debatable if section 80VVA is applied. This being so, the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal erred

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

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

31 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur thus reverse the CCIT’s findings as well as Revenue’s argument on the latter account as well. 7.8 Lastly comes the Revenue’s concluding argument that the CCIT has rightly held that assessee’s trustees had unbridled powers and they had also received payments from the former

TRIJAL ENTERPRISES,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 4(1), BHUBANESWAR

Bench: S/Shri George Mathan & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2016-17 Trijal Enterprises, Hall No.6, Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), Fourth Floor, Bmc Bhawani Bhubaneswar Coom. Complex, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aakft 6687 L (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra,Ca P.K.Panda, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar Dated 22.6.2020 In Appeal No.0366/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm. The Partnership Firm Was Originally Constituted By Partnership Deed Dated 1.11.2015, Wherein, There Were Two Partners Namely; Shri Rajesh Polaki & Sri Malchit Chetan Kumar Patra. The Said Partnership Did Not Do Any Business. The Partnership Was Constituted For The Purpose Of Doing The Business Of Gold Jewellery. The Partnership Was Reconstituted On 1.3.2016, P A G E 1 | 37 Assessment Year : 2016-17

31 of paper book, which was Notes on financial statements for the period ended 31.3.2016, wherein, in non- trade investment, the investment with related parties being the investment with the partnership firm Trijal Enterprises has been shown at Rs.31,35,47,308 and investment in gold has been shown at Rs.2,54,50,000/-. Ld AR further drew our attention

DHANESWAR RATH INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND MEDICAL SCIENCES,CUTTACK vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed

section 263.Mere non-mentioning of these reasons do not render the assessment order "erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue". As long as the action of the Assessing Officer cannot be said to be lacking bonafides, his action in accepting an explanation of the assessee cannot be faulted merely because it could have been lawful to make mere

BIBHUDUTTA PANDA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ASST.CIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

31 ITA Nos.76-81/CTK/2022 approval of the commissioner of Income Tax on the facts and circumstance of the case ? 3. Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the assessment order passed on 27th April, 2007 is barred by limitation as successive direction under section 142(2A) is not permissible and the second direction given to obtain the audit