MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.,BURLA, SAMBALPUR. vs. DCIT CIRCLE2(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue being ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.14 To 17/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.41/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Vs Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.70 To 73/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.147/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.69/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Poddar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

penalty on account of various disallowance made in the assessment order for the assessment year 2015-2016. It was the submission

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.,BURLA, SAMBALPUR. vs. DCIT CIRCLE2(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue being ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.14 To 17/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.41/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Vs Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.70 To 73/Ctk/2023 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.147/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2016-2017 To 2020-2021) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.69/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Acit/Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur-768020 Pan No. :Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Poddar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

penalty on account of various disallowance made in the assessment order for the assessment year 2015-2016. It was the submission

ORISSA RURAL HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED(ORHDC),KHORDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

disallowed the interest shown to be due to the Government by applying the provision for section 43B of the Act. It was the submission that the interest payable to the Government was not hit by the provisions of section 43B of the Act. It was against the assessment orders. It was the submission that the penalty

ORISSA RURAL HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED(ORHDC),KHORDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

disallowed the interest shown to be due to the Government by applying the provision for section 43B of the Act. It was the submission that the interest payable to the Government was not hit by the provisions of section 43B of the Act. It was against the assessment orders. It was the submission that the penalty

MARUTI TRADING CO,JAGAATSINGHPUR vs. ITO WARD PARADEEP, PARADEEP

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialassessment Year : 2015-16 Maruti Trading Co., Maruti Trading Co., Panisalia, Vs. Ito, Ward, Paradeep. Ito, Ward, Paradeep. Jagatsinghpur. Jagatsinghpur. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aalfm 3677 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/0 /08/2023 O R D E R

disallowance of expenses in the profit and loss account. It was the submission that consequent to the said additions, penalty

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

disallowance to 50%, however, confirmed the addition on account of introduction of capital. Further the AO imposed the penalty u/s.271

SMT. POONAM PUJARI,ROURKELA vs. PR. CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathanbefore Member & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2014-15

penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act at Rs.1,87,03045/- on the amount of Rs.5,49,70,718/- being the amount disallowed

MOTWANI CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LIMITED,KHORDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assesee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Motwani Constructions Pvt. Limited Vs Dcit, Circle-1(1), Cuttack At:- Ground Floor, Samabaya Bhawan, Janpath, Khurda 751022 Pan No. : Aagcm 2496 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Order Dated 13/08/2025 Passed In Appeal No. Nfac/2012-13/10027542 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That In The Course Of Assessment, The Ao Had Disallowed The Salary Paid To The Director To An Extent Of Rs.15 Lakhs On The Ground That There Is A Delay In Deduction Of Tds & Payment Of The Same To The Credit Of The Government. It Was The Submission That The Returns Of The Directors Have Also Been Filed Wherein The Tds Has Been Claimed & The Credits Have Been Allowed. It Was The Submission That No Disallowance Is Called For In View Of The Decision Of The Hon’Ble

penalty under Section 271C of the Income-tax Act." 3. It was further submitted that the AO has disallowed Rs.52

SIDDARTHINI NANDA,NAYASARAK, CUTTACK vs. ASST. CIT( CIRCLE-1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.196/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Indu Devi Tibarewal, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, At/Po: Nayasarak, Bhubaneswar Cuttack-753002 Pan No. :Acxpt 4424 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.197/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Siddarthini Nanda, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Nayasarak, Bhubaneswar Cuttack-753002 Pan No. :Abapn 0104 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that both the assessees had disclosed agricultural income in their respective returns. The AO had disallowed

INDU DEVI TIBAREWAL,CUTTACK vs. ASST.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.196/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Indu Devi Tibarewal, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, At/Po: Nayasarak, Bhubaneswar Cuttack-753002 Pan No. :Acxpt 4424 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.197/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Siddarthini Nanda, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Nayasarak, Bhubaneswar Cuttack-753002 Pan No. :Abapn 0104 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that both the assessees had disclosed agricultural income in their respective returns. The AO had disallowed

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

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) ..

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance u/s. 37 would\nonly come into play if the assessee had been penalised under the\nappropriate rules of the above mentioned statutes and the assessee\nhad claimed this penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance u/s. 37 would\nonly come into play if the assessee had been penalised under the\nappropriate rules of the above mentioned statutes and the assessee\nhad claimed this penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance u/s. 37 would\nonly come into play if the assessee had been penalised under the\nappropriate rules of the above mentioned statutes and the assessee\nhad claimed this penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance u/s. 37 would\nonly come into play if the assessee had been penalised under the\nappropriate rules of the above mentioned statutes and the assessee\nhad claimed this penalty

UTKAL FLOUR MILLS PVT LTD,BHUBANESWAR, ODISHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BHUBANESWAR, ODISHA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita

disallowed the same by observing that the demand created by the department towards the entry tax is penal in nature without appreciating the fact that the entire demand was in relation to the entry tax and interest thereon and no penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ODISHA vs. ODISHA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED, ODISHA

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2020-2021 2021 Dcit, Aayakar Bhavan, Main Dcit, Aayakar Bhavan, Main Vs. Odisha Odisha State State Beverages Beverages 2Nd Building, Building, Rajaswas Rajaswas Vihar, Vihar, Corporation Corporation Limited., Limited., 2 Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar. Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar. Floor, Floor, Fortune Fortune Towers, Towers, S.E.Rly S.E.Rly Proj. Proj. Complex, Complex, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No. (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Satyajit Mishra, Ca Satyajit Mishra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 21.9.2023 Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S.270A Of 21.9.2023 Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S.270A Of The Act For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2020-2021. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 23.9.2 Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 23.9.2022 By Disallowing A Sum Of 022 By Disallowing A Sum Of Rs.3,00,00,000/ Rs.3,00,00,000/- Out Of Expenses Claimed By The Assessee On Account Of Out Of Expenses Claimed By The Assessee On Account Of License Fees U/S.40(A)(Iib) Of The Act. Simultaneously, Penalty Proceedings License Fees U/S.40(A)(Iib) Of The Act. Simultaneously, Penalty Proceedings License Fees U/S.40(A)(Iib) Of The Act. Simultaneously, Penalty Proceedings

disallowing a sum of Rs.3,00,00,000/ Rs.3,00,00,000/- out of expenses claimed by the assessee on account of out of expenses claimed by the assessee on account of license fees u/s.40(a)(iib) of the Act. Simultaneously, penalty

DEBASIS PADHI,BERHAMPUR vs. ASST.CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.208 To 214/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2022 Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2015 10 To 2015-16

penalty proceedings shows that the AO has specifically taken a stand that the books of account have never been produced before him and when the remand report has been given to the assessee, the assessee has chosen to not to respond to the same. A perusal of section 44AA shows that every person carrying on, in the present assessee