TUFF TUBES (ORISSA) (P) LTD.,JANKIA, KHORDHA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16

deposits in the bank account are from the cash book of the assessee and also from the bank substantially with the cash withdrawals which have been treated as disallowable

SRI SIBA SHANKAR DAS(DECEZASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SMT. RITANJALI DAS,KALAHANDI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

deposit of Rs,48,50,000/- cash in the bank account of the assessee. Consequently, the addition as made by the AO and as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. 5. The second issue raised by the ld. AR was in respect of an addition of Rs.1,60,07,807/- being the reimbursement of labour charges paid

DEBASHREE PRIYADARSHINI SETHY,KANSAR, KENDRAPARA vs. ITO WARD, KENDRAPARA, KENDRAPARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.132/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Debashree Priadarshini Sethy, Vs Ito, Ward Kendrapara, C/O-Prahlad Sethy Kansar, Kendrapara Via-Baldadevjew, Kendrapara-754212 Pan No. :Fsdps 3497 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2024 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 16.01.2024, In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059784550(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. As Per The Office Note, There Is A Delay Of 14 Days In Filing The Appeal. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Along With Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay. Ld. Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 14 Days In Filing The Present Appeal & The Appeal Is Heard & Disposed Off Finally On Merits. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Case Of The Assessee Was Taken Up For Limited Scrutiny For The Sole Reason To Verify The Cash Deposit During

cash deposit over the sale proceeds; (iii) introduction of capital of Rs.25,00,000/-: . (iv)Deposits of old specified notes (SBN) of Rs,46,500/-. 3.1 After covering of all the relevant points a show cause notice was issued on 16/12/2019 seeking for compliance by 19/12/2019, There is no compliance by that date or till date. On basis of materials

SAMIR KUMAR PAIKARAY,KHURDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KHURDA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 382/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Samir Kumar Paikaray,………….………….,…Appellant Sriram Nagar, Khurdha, Dist. Khurda-752022, Odisha [Pan:Ahcpp4275D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…....Respondent Khurda Ward, Khurda, Dist. Khurda-752022, Odisha Appearances By: Shri K.K. Bal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 03, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: October 30, 2025 O R D E R

cash credit under section 68 representing deposit of SBN (+) Addition on account Rs.41,456/- of undisclosed asset being undisclosed income (+) Disallowance

PRAVAKAR SAMANTA,NAHARAPUR vs. ITO, WARD JAJPUR, JAJPUR WARD, JAJPUT

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

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.355/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Pravakar Samanta, Vs Ito, Ward Jajpur At-Naharapur, Jajpur Town-755001 Pan No. :Anaps 7558 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 30.11.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1058346163(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri Mohit Sheth, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That There Are Three Additions In Dispute. First, Being An Amount Of Rs.7,85,000/- Representing Sbn Notes Deposited During The Demonetisation Period In The Current Account & Od Account Of The Assessee. Secondly, The Addition Of Rs.8,45,068/- Representing The Time Deposit Of The Assessee Treating The Same As Unexplained Investment Of The Assessee. Thirdly, The Addition Of Rs.1,52,897/- Representing The Deduction Claimed U/S.80C Under Chapter Via On The Payment Made Towards Lic Premium.

cash in the accounts of the assessee. This being so, the addition of Rs.7,85,000/- as made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. 7. With regard to addition of Rs.8,45,068/- representing the time deposit, the ld. AR has placed before me various fixed deposit receipts. It was the submission that these

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

cash deposit in bank account of Rs.1,28,90,120/- and iii) disallowance of interest on certain depreciation of Rs.5

NISHA DATA COM LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

cash deposit in the bank account, ₹2,20,309/- as FDR with Oriental Bank of Commerce, ₹5,80,067/- as Expenditure disallowed

NISHA DATA COM LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

cash deposit in the bank account, ₹2,20,309/- as FDR with Oriental Bank of Commerce, ₹5,80,067/- as Expenditure disallowed

PRASANTA KUMAR MOHAPATRA,KEONJHAR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.113/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Prasanta Kumar Mohapatra, Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur Mining Road, New Market, Keonjhar, Odisha Pan No. :Aavpm 9636 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Advocate 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. Pr.Cit, Sambalpur Dated 25.08.2021, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1035100447(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That, The Ld Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax Has Committed Serious Error In Modify The Order Of Assessment Passed By The Ld Assessing Officer Which Is Unjust, Illegal, Arbitrary, Without Jurisdiction, Contrary To The Provisions F The Act, Contrary To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Has Been Made In Gross Violation To The Principles Of Natural Justice & Is Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Annulled. 2. That, The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Sambalpur Has Erred Both In Law & In Fact By Invoking The Section 263 Of The Act Which Is Beyond The Jurisdiction Vested With The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax & For Which The Order Thereof Is Liable To Be Quashed & / Or Annulled. 3. That, The Ld Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax Has Erred Both In Law & In Fact By Invoking The Section 263 Of The Act Which Is Beyond The Scope Of Power Vested With The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax & For Which The Order There Off Is Liable To Be Quashed & / Or Annulled.

disallowance of Rs.3 lakh was made to the returned income. Thereafter the ld. PCIT Sambalpur had initiated the proceedings u/s 263 and passed the impugned order wherein ld. PCIT has modified the assessment order and added a sum of Rs. 3,44,64,222/- u/s. 68 towards unexplained cash credits against which the assessee is in appeal before

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

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

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-

cash deposits during demonetization, the learned AO made additions on issues that were not part of the issues for which 'limited scrutiny' initiated. It was held that without following the procedure as contemplated in CBDT Instruction bearing No. 5 of 2016 for converting a 'limited scrutiny' assessment into a 'complete scrutiny' assessment, the AO could not assume jurisdiction to make

SMT. PURNIMA DAS,BHUBANESWAR vs. PR. CIT-1,, BHUBANESWAR

Bench: S/Shri George Mathan & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Purnima Das, C/O. Vs. Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar-1. Biswajit Das, At-9, Budha Nagar, Budheswari, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aazpd0112 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Pr.Cit Passed U./S.263 Of The Act, Dated 12.3.2022 In Appeal No. Itba/Rev/F/Reev5/2021-22/10540634159(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee Assisted By Ms.Sugyanee Kuanr & Ms. Simran Samal, Intern From Birla School Of Law (Bgu), Bhubaneswar & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue Assisted By Shri Dharmashoka Panda, Intern From Birla School Of Law (Bgu), Bhubaneswar. 3. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar That The Assessee Is An Individual, Who Is A Professor Of Mathematics At P.N.College, Khurda. The Assessee Had Filed Her Return Of Income For The Relevant Assessment Year On 5.8.2017

cash during demonetization period. When, Government declared ban on utilization of old denomination of Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/-, your Assessee had no other option than to deposit it in bank. Further, your Assessee submits herewith copies of Agreement towards Booking of flat, possession letter, purchase deed and sale deed of flat and the confirmation letter received from the so called

INTEGRAL PUBLICATION PVT LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. PR. CIT-1,, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.264/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Integral Publication Pvt. Ltd., Vs Pr.Cit-1, Bhubaneswar Plot No.464, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751007 Pan No. :Aabci 0931 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Shri Chitrasen Parida, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024

disallowable" shows an amount of RS.NIL. Audit report in Form 3CO for the AY 17-18 at para 21(d),.it is certified that on the basis of examination of books of account and other relevant documents /evidence, the payment referred to in Sec 40A(3) r.w. Rule 600 has been made by account payee cheque or account payee bank

BISHNU CHARAN PANDA,PURI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assesee are partly allowed for

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)

cash deposit during the demonetization period has also been disallowed and there has been addition under the head income from

BISHNU CHARAN PANDA,PURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PURI

In the result, both appeals of the assesee are partly allowed for

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)

cash deposit during the demonetization period has also been disallowed and there has been addition under the head income from

NIRANJAN DWARI THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SAIRENDRI DWARI,SUNDARGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JHARSUGUDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Niranjan Dwari (Through Legal Heir Sairendri Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Dwari) Jharsuguda, Odisha-768201 Vs. M-61, R.R.I.T. Colony, Rangadhipa, Odisha-770001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aespd2117D Assessee By : Shri Manoj Kumar Sultania, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nishanth Rao B, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.07.2025

cash deposit. It was the submission that the ld. AO has also recognized that the funds from the said bank accounts have been subsequently transferred to Indian Oil Corporation. It was the submission that the bank accounts of the assessee also included the contract receipts and the receipts from the plying three trucks in respect of which also the assessee

GOPABANDHU DASH,KENDRAPARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KENDRAPARA WARD, KENDRAPARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18

cash deposit was in demonetized currency to an extent of Rs,.5,75,000/- deposited in the demonetized currency. It was a submission that these were currencies given to the assessee by the assessee’s client for making payment of LIC premium. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer also recognized that the assessee is an authorized premium point

SKD RICE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,RADHADAMODARPUR vs. PR.CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2016-2017 2017 Skd Skd Rice Rice Industries Industries Pvt Pvt Vs. Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar-1 Ltd., At-Radhadamodarpur, Radhadamodarpur, Khuntuni, Cuttack Khuntuni, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaucs 4368 J (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ca S.K.Sarangi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/0 04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/0 /04/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

cash deposit in the bank account to the AO with the direction that the AO may in the light of discussion supra, call for destination of payments by transfer to further probe into the nature of transaction with the parties, examine the issue and pass a speaking order on disallowance

SHASANK SEKHAR NAYAK, BHUBANESWAR,BHUBANESWAR vs. PR.CIT, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.62/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Shasank Sekhar Nayak, Vs Pr.Cit-1, Bhubaneswar Keshari Bhawan, Bindusagar Road Old Town, Bhubaneswar-751002 Pan No. :Abyn 8766 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Nihar Ranjan Biswal, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit, Bhubaneswar-1, Dated 31.12.2021, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1038327224(1), For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 370 Days. In This Regard, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Filed An Application Along With Affidavit Of The Assessee For Condonation Of The Delay, To Which The Ld. Cit-Dr Has Not Raised Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. On Perusal Of The Application & The Affidavit Of The Assessee, We Found That The Delay Occurred Due To Bonafide Reasons. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 370 Days In Filing The Appeal & Appeal Is Disposed Off Finally.

cash deposits in the bank accounts during the year”, the issue raised by the ld. Pr.CIT in respect of excess payment of Rs.20,000/-may otherwise than by account payee cheque or by account payee bank draft, cannot be considered as making the order passed by the ld. AO u/s.143(3) of the Act, erroneous and prejudicial to the interest