BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

100 results for “disallowance”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,900Delhi2,315Kolkata1,841Chennai870Bangalore784Ahmedabad667Pune497Jaipur334Raipur309Hyderabad291Surat229Chandigarh226Rajkot217Indore142Visakhapatnam140Nagpur139Amritsar118Karnataka113Cuttack100Lucknow97Cochin97Guwahati73Ranchi51Patna46Calcutta44SC28Jodhpur25Allahabad22Agra17Varanasi17Panaji16Telangana15Jabalpur14Kerala9Dehradun8Orissa4Himachal Pradesh3Rajasthan2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 26379Section 801A63Addition to Income55Disallowance45Section 143(3)34Deduction34Section 153A22Section 14A16Section 4015Depreciation

POSCO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 253/CTK/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack03 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.253/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-2021) Posco India Private Limited, Vs Dcit, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar Unit No.Dcb 903, 9Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Idco Info Park, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Aadcp 6735 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri B.K.Mahapatra & A.K.Sabat, Cas राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/09/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pcit, Bhubaneswar-1, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1063289089(1) For The Assessment Year 2020-2021, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances The Case, The Order Passed On 24.03.2024 U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short "I.T.Act "I "Act"] Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Bhubaneswar [In Short "Pcit"] [Vide Din & Order No :Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1063289089(1)}, In Directing The Learned Assessing Officer [In Short "Ao"] To Examine The Issue Is Against The Principle Of Natural Justice, Contrary To Facts, Arbitrary & Erroneous & Bad, Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts & Legally Untenable. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances The Case, The. Notice Dated 05.02.2024 U/S.263 Of The Act & The Assuming Of Jurisdiction U/S.263 Of The Act By The Learned Pcit Is Contrary To Facts, Arbitrary, Erroneous & Bad, Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts & Legally Untenable.

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra & A.K.Sabat, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

Showing 1–20 of 100 · Page 1 of 5

15
Section 14714
Section 15413
Section 143(3)
Section 263

disallow the business loss of Rs.1,47,26,425/- pertaining to A.Y.2018-2019 as claimed by the assessee and allowed by the AO; and ii) To reduce the interest income from the fixed assets based on the decision of the ITAT Cuttack Bench in assessee’s own case for the A.Y.2015-2016. 3. Before us, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that

KALPANA MISHRA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD 5(4), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 491/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.491/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs Ito Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Alfpm 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri B.R.Pattnaik, Ca राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.03.2024, Passed By The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1062168195(1) For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds :- 1. Hon'Ble Cit(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Ao Even Though The Learned Ao Has Exceeded His Jurisdiction In A Limited Scrutiny Case Selected Under Cass Only To Examine Whether The Investment & Income Relating To Securities Transactions Are Duly Disclosed Or Not & Added A Sum Of Rs.44,00,000.00 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Obtaining Prior Administrative Approval Of The Concerned Pr. Cit/Cit As Prescribed In Circular F. No. 225/402/2018/Ita.Ii, Dated 28- 11-2018 & Instruction No.5/2016 [F.No.225/269/2015-

Section 68

carry forward of brought forward unabsorbed loss and depreciation which were not subject of 'limited scrutiny', Assessing Officer exceeded his jurisdiction by enquiring into issues beyond scope of 'limited scrutiny' and thus, the impugned order was to be quashed. Cases relied on / referred to: a) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 97 Taxman 358/229

ODISA HYDRO POWER CORPORATION LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 180/CTK/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sidhartha RanjanFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (
Section 72

carry forward the intent of the Central Government to assist State Governments, Cooperative Societies, etc. Since this is the business activity, that is what has persuaded us to opine that the income generated in the form of interest on the unutilised capital is in the nature of business income. The objectives are wholly socio- economic and the amounts received including

M/S. ODISHA HYDRO POWER CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ADDL.CIT, BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 226/CTK/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jun 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sidhartha RanjanFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (
Section 72

carry forward the intent of the Central Government to assist State Governments, Cooperative Societies, etc. Since this is the business activity, that is what has persuaded us to opine that the income generated in the form of interest on the unutilised capital is in the nature of business income. The objectives are wholly socio- economic and the amounts received including

ORISSA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 338/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack13 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sidhartha RanjanFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (
Section 72

carry forward the intent of the Central Government to assist State Governments, Cooperative Societies, etc. Since this is the business activity, that is what has persuaded us to opine that the income generated in the form of interest on the unutilised capital is in the nature of business income. The objectives are wholly socio- economic and the amounts received including

ORISSA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 43/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack13 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sidhartha RanjanFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (
Section 72

carry forward the intent of the Central Government to assist State Governments, Cooperative Societies, etc. Since this is the business activity, that is what has persuaded us to opine that the income generated in the form of interest on the unutilised capital is in the nature of business income. The objectives are wholly socio- economic and the amounts received including

ORISSA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 276/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack13 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sidhartha RanjanFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (
Section 72

carry forward the intent of the Central Government to assist State Governments, Cooperative Societies, etc. Since this is the business activity, that is what has persuaded us to opine that the income generated in the form of interest on the unutilised capital is in the nature of business income. The objectives are wholly socio- economic and the amounts received including

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

ITA 301/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA walla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT
Section 4

carry forward losses. But the ratio of the aforesaid judgment is squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case as in para 11 of its judgment the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that “As per the settled position of law, an assessee claiming exemption has to strictly and literally comply with the exemption provisions.” 1.4 Against the order

RADHANATH MOHANTY,BHUBANESWAR vs. PCIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 27/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Purnendu Bhusan Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

carried forward from the earlier years, admittedly, this issue is not one which can fall within the purview of revision u/s.263 of the Act and consequently the revisionary proceedings on this issue stands quashed. 12. In regard to the next issue of net profit from the electrical and sanitary business, which appeared to be low, it was submitted

GANESH ORES PRIVATE LIMITED,CIVIL TOWNSHIP,ROURKELA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROURKELA CIRCLE,ROURKELA

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

ITA 45/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack11 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.44 & 45 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016 16 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S.K.AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 133(6)Section 14Section 43(5)(d)Section 73

disallowance as made by the P a g e 3 | 7 ITA Nos.44 & 45 /CTK/2024 Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) is liable to be upheld in regard to speculative transaction and unsecured loans. 7. We have considered the rival submissions. In the present case, it would be worthwhile to extract

GANESH ORES PRIVATE LIMITED,CIVIL TOWNSHIP ROURKELA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ROURKELA CIRCLE,ROURKELA

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

ITA 44/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack11 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.44 & 45 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016 16 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S.K.AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 133(6)Section 14Section 43(5)(d)Section 73

disallowance as made by the P a g e 3 | 7 ITA Nos.44 & 45 /CTK/2024 Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) is liable to be upheld in regard to speculative transaction and unsecured loans. 7. We have considered the rival submissions. In the present case, it would be worthwhile to extract

HANUMAN KHEDARIA HUF,ROURKELA vs. ITO WARD 2, ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 275/CTK/2023[ASST. YEAR 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2023

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2014-15 Hanuman Khedaria (Huf), Hanuman Khedaria (Huf), Vs. Ito, Ward Ito, Ward-2, Rourkela. C/O. Kadmawala & Co., Ca, C/O. Kadmawala & Co., Ca, Budhram Budhram Oram Oram Market, Market, Kachery Road, Rourkela. Kachery Road, Rourkela. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No. (Appellant) ) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.R.Sahu, Ca .R.Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/12 12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri M.R.Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr
Section 131

carrying out the transaction of securities for financial gains, are liable to pay STT. All gains from such transactions are called capital gains and are classified as LTCG or STCG, depending on the holding period. Therefore, the alleged substantial questions of law as proposed by the Revenue cannot be sustained in the eye of law, as the same is contrary

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 370/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2024AY 2014-15

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/-

For Appellant: Sh A.K.Sabat & Sh B.K.Mahapatra, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 123Section 14ASection 2Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

carried forward from the erstwhile company namely M/s MGM Minerals Pvt. Ltd. from where the assessee got such assets and liabilities. Since all the loans taken were in the nature of term loan and were specifically taken and utilised for the purpose of acquisition of business assets, therefore, no amount out of such borrowings were utilised in making interest free

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

ITA 125/CTK/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

loss account. Once the income has accrued then it can't be turned into "no income" on account of future happenings. The order of OERC determining or reducing tariff in current year or future years has not been produced before the A.O. or CIT (Appeals). v.) Creation of a Regulatory Asset is a mechanism to carry forward a portion

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

ITA 17/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

loss account. Once the income has accrued then it can't be turned into "no income" on account of future happenings. The order of OERC determining or reducing tariff in current year or future years has not been produced before the A.O. or CIT (Appeals). v.) Creation of a Regulatory Asset is a mechanism to carry forward a portion

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

ITA 16/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

loss account. Once the income has accrued then it can't be turned into "no income" on account of future happenings. The order of OERC determining or reducing tariff in current year or future years has not been produced before the A.O. or CIT (Appeals). v.) Creation of a Regulatory Asset is a mechanism to carry forward a portion

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

ITA 220/CTK/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

loss account. Once the income has accrued then it can't be turned into "no income" on account of future happenings. The order of OERC determining or reducing tariff in current year or future years has not been produced before the A.O. or CIT (Appeals). v.) Creation of a Regulatory Asset is a mechanism to carry forward a portion

KALINGA MINING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. PCIT-1 BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 90/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.90/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Kalinga Mining Corporation Pvt. Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Bhubaneswar-1 Samanta Niwas, Seikh Bazar, Cuttack Pan No. :Aadck 6791 N (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Jesthi & P.K.Mohanty, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

disallowable being paid for illegal activities. The Government has claimed it as per the part of the clause of the lease deed therefore cannot be termed as penalty.” 4. It was submitted that consequently the issue has been held in favour of the assessee and the method of accounting followed by the 4 assessee is consistent, therefore, the revision

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

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for respective assessment years under consideration are allowed

ITA 143/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.143 To 145/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 To 2014-2015) M/S Pragati Milk Products(P) Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Plot No.71/A/1, New Industrial Estate, Jagatpur, Cuttack-754021 Pan No. :Aaecp 6353 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.10.2018, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0487/2017-18 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was Search In The Premises Of The Assessee. As A Consequence Of Search, Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.153A Of The Act. In The Assessment U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Had Been Granted The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib(11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Said Assessment Order Was The Subject Matter Of Rectification Application On Multiple Occasions & In The Third Round Of Rectification Application The Ao Has Withdrawn The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib (11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The 2

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

loss account. Besides above, there could not be sales of Rs.1.90 crores during a trial run and assessee company had also paid VAT on sales as evident from VAT returns filed by it. It is unimaginable that an assessee could have incurred expenditure of Rs.1,95,79,747/- during a trial run. These facts can't be repudiated

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

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for respective assessment years under consideration are allowed

ITA 145/CTK/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.143 To 145/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 To 2014-2015) M/S Pragati Milk Products(P) Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Plot No.71/A/1, New Industrial Estate, Jagatpur, Cuttack-754021 Pan No. :Aaecp 6353 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.10.2018, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0487/2017-18 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was Search In The Premises Of The Assessee. As A Consequence Of Search, Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.153A Of The Act. In The Assessment U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Had Been Granted The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib(11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Said Assessment Order Was The Subject Matter Of Rectification Application On Multiple Occasions & In The Third Round Of Rectification Application The Ao Has Withdrawn The Benefit Of Deduction U/S.80Ib (11A) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The 2

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 80I

loss account. Besides above, there could not be sales of Rs.1.90 crores during a trial run and assessee company had also paid VAT on sales as evident from VAT returns filed by it. It is unimaginable that an assessee could have incurred expenditure of Rs.1,95,79,747/- during a trial run. These facts can't be repudiated