Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

83 results for “disallowance”+ Section 144clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,110 Delhi1,540 Kolkata674 Bangalore543 Chennai530 Ahmedabad427 Jaipur375 Pune333 Hyderabad317 Surat208 Chandigarh166 Cochin164 Visakhapatnam150 Indore147 Rajkot128 Amritsar121 Raipur108 Cuttack83 Lucknow81 Nagpur71 Agra53 Allahabad52 Patna39 Guwahati39 Jodhpur38 Karnataka36 Calcutta36 Panaji25 Telangana22 Jabalpur19 Dehradun17 SC16 Ranchi12 Varanasi8 Rajasthan2 Punjab & Haryana2 Kerala2 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 Orissa1

Key Topics

Addition to Income47 Section 1045 Section 14443 Section 14733 Disallowance31 Section 4028 Deduction25 Section 26324 Section 143(2)21 Section 143(3)

EASTERN ENGINEERING VENTURE,ANGUL vs. ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 325/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2009-2010

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 184(5)

section 144. 10. A plain reading of these two legislative provisions shows that the disallowance under section 184(5) comes

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5

20

Charitable Trust16

DEOKARAN DAS RAMBILASH,SUNDARGARH vs. ITA, WARD-04, , ROURKELA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 218/CTK/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicialassessment Year : 2010-2011 Deokaran Das Deokaran Das Rambilash, Old Vs. Ito, Ward -4, Station Road, Rourkela. Station Road, Rourkela. Rourkela. Pan/Gir No.Aadfd 9708 K Aadfd 9708 K (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agarwalla, Ar Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Dr Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/05/ 2021 1 Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/20 /2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

section 144 of the Act on 21.3.2013 on a total assessed income of Rs.9,71,380/-, after rejecting books of account u/s.145(3) of the Act and computed the net profit @ 4% on total turnover of Rs.9,71,381/- and disallowed

M/S. B.M.T. PROFILE,MAYURBHANJ vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 339/CTK/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.339/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Bmt Profile, Vs. Acit, Balasore Circle, Bhanjpur, Ward No.2, Baripada, Balasore Mayurbhanj, Odisha स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aahfb 8131 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 06/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 28.06.2018 Passed In First Appeal No.0295/2015-16 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. Ld. Assessee Representative(Ar) Submitted That The Assessee Does Not Want To Press The Grounds No.1, 2, 4 & 5, Hence, The Same Are Dismissed As Not Pressed. 3. Remaining Sole Effective Ground Of Assessee For Adjudication I.E. Ground No.3 Reads As Follows :- “3. For That, The Denial Of Deduction Of Salary To Partners & Interest To Capital Contribution Deserves To Be Allowed On The Ground That, There Has Been No Violation To Section 184(5) For Completing The Assessment Under Section 144.” 4. Ld. Ar Has Also Filed An Application Dated 16.05.2019 For Admission Of Additional Ground, Which Reads As Under :-

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 184(5)Section 263

section 144 of the Act, therefore, salary and interest on capital to partners cannot be disallowed by invoking provisions of Section

M/S. JAI HANUMAN ENTERPRISES (FIRM),ANGUL vs. ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 233/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.233/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Jai Hanuman Vs. Ito, Angul Ward, Angul, Enterprises(Firm), Odisha At-Sanjeebani Market, Angul-759122 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaefj 7680 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty & Shri S.K.Dehuri, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 12/03/2019 आदेश / O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 28.02.2017 Passed In First Appeal No.0024/2015-16 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. Ld. Assessee‟S Representative (Ar) Submitted That The Assessee Does Not Want To Press The Ground Nos.1 & 2, Accordingly, The Same Are Dismissed As Not Pressed. Grounds No.5 & 6 Are Of General In Nature, Therefore, The Same Are Not Being Adjudicated. 3. Now, The Remaining Effective Grounds Are Ground No.3 & 4, Which Read As Under :- “3. That, The Learned C.I.T (Appeals) Has Misconstrued/ Misappreciated The Facts & His Order Dated 28Th February

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Sections 144, 145(3) and 184(5) of the Act, I am of the considered view that the disallowance u/s.184

DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. SRI JAGANNATH PROPERTIES & DEVELOPERS, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross

ITA 283/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2013-2014

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Mohapatra, CIT DR

144 of the Act. Thus, according to the statutory provisions of section 145(3), the Assessing Officer has to record his dissatisfaction about the correctness and completeness of the accounts of the assessee before rejecting books of account. In this case Id A.O has rejected the computation of the assessee. Even if he could have resorted to rejection of books

M/S. MAA TARINI MINERALS PVT. LTD.,ROURKELA vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 201/CTK/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.201-205/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2019-2020) M/S Tarini Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur A-6, Commercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No. :Aaact 6489 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2023 In The Following Appeals :-

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

disallowances which includes the additions on account of suppression of sale. In first appeal, ld. CIT (A) allowed substantial relief to the assessee and only sustained the addition on account of suppression of sale for all the years and the amount of Rs. 17,86,243/- pertained to AY 2014-15. 4 ITA Nos.201-205/CTK/2023 4. During the course of hearing

M/S. MAA TARINI MINERALS PVT. LTD.,ROURKELA vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 205/CTK/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.201-205/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2019-2020) M/S Tarini Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur A-6, Commercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No. :Aaact 6489 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2023 In The Following Appeals :-

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

disallowances which includes the additions on account of suppression of sale. In first appeal, ld. CIT (A) allowed substantial relief to the assessee and only sustained the addition on account of suppression of sale for all the years and the amount of Rs. 17,86,243/- pertained to AY 2014-15. 4 ITA Nos.201-205/CTK/2023 4. During the course of hearing

M/S. MAA TARINI MINERALS PVT. LTD.,ROURKELA vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 202/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.201-205/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2019-2020) M/S Tarini Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur A-6, Commercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No. :Aaact 6489 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2023 In The Following Appeals :-

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

disallowances which includes the additions on account of suppression of sale. In first appeal, ld. CIT (A) allowed substantial relief to the assessee and only sustained the addition on account of suppression of sale for all the years and the amount of Rs. 17,86,243/- pertained to AY 2014-15. 4 ITA Nos.201-205/CTK/2023 4. During the course of hearing

M/S. MAA TARINI MINERALS PVT. LTD.,ROURKELA vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 204/CTK/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.201-205/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2019-2020) M/S Tarini Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur A-6, Commercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No. :Aaact 6489 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2023 In The Following Appeals :-

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

disallowances which includes the additions on account of suppression of sale. In first appeal, ld. CIT (A) allowed substantial relief to the assessee and only sustained the addition on account of suppression of sale for all the years and the amount of Rs. 17,86,243/- pertained to AY 2014-15. 4 ITA Nos.201-205/CTK/2023 4. During the course of hearing

M/S. MAA TARINI MINERALS PVT. LTD.,ROURKELA vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 203/CTK/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.201-205/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2019-2020) M/S Tarini Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur A-6, Commercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No. :Aaact 6489 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2023 In The Following Appeals :-

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

disallowances which includes the additions on account of suppression of sale. In first appeal, ld. CIT (A) allowed substantial relief to the assessee and only sustained the addition on account of suppression of sale for all the years and the amount of Rs. 17,86,243/- pertained to AY 2014-15. 4 ITA Nos.201-205/CTK/2023 4. During the course of hearing

KAMYAB TELEVISION (P) LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 537/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.536 & 537/Ctk/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2017-18 Assessment Year 18 Kamyab Television Pvt. Ltd., Plot Kamyab Television Pvt. Ltd., Plot Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Dcit, Corporate Circle No.159, Alaka Unit No.159, Alaka Unit-Ii, Ashok Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No Aaecm 3608 B Aaecm 3608 B (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr & S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/20 024

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvFor Respondent: Shri

Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 5

144 of the Act. P a g e 1 | 6 ITA Nos.536 & 537/CTK/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-1 & 2017-18 2. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, ld CIT DR and S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. 3. The appeal in ITA No.536/CTK/2024 for the assessment year 2013- 14 is time barred

KAMYAB TELEVISION(P) LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 536/CTK/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.536 & 537/Ctk/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2017-18 Assessment Year 18 Kamyab Television Pvt. Ltd., Plot Kamyab Television Pvt. Ltd., Plot Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Dcit, Corporate Circle No.159, Alaka Unit No.159, Alaka Unit-Ii, Ashok Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No Aaecm 3608 B Aaecm 3608 B (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr & S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/20 024

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvFor Respondent: Shri

Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 5

144 of the Act. P a g e 1 | 6 ITA Nos.536 & 537/CTK/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-1 & 2017-18 2. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, ld CIT DR and S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. 3. The appeal in ITA No.536/CTK/2024 for the assessment year 2013- 14 is time barred

SUBHALAXMI AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,NAYAGARH vs. JCIT, RAMGE-2, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and that of

ITA 132/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 194ASection 194CSection 194JSection 40

disallowing interest of Rs.1,49,144/- paid to NBFC and audit fees of Rs.1,35,300/- u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has paid interest of Rs.1,49,144/- to Non-banking finance company (NBFC) and also Rs.1,35,300/- to auditor as audit

PURNA CHANDRA BISWAL,JAJPUR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 200/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.200/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Sri Purna Chandra Biswal, Vs. Principal Cit, Cuttack Jakhapura, Jajpur-755019 स्थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Aclpb 1493 P (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Citdr

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CITDR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)Section 263Section 44ASection 68

144 of the Act as noted in para 3 of the assessment order. However, the Pr. CIT invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Act directed the AO to decide on the chargeability of unexplained cash credit of Rs.2,69,16,055/- in the form of “sundry creditors for raw material and expenses”, to income tax as the income

ACIT, ROURKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA vs. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

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

ITA 373/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

144. Therefore, it is sine qua non that the AO come to a conclusion that Books of Accounts maintained by the assessee are incorrect or incomplete or unreliable and rejects the books of Accounts before proceeding to make his own assessment. In instant case, there is no reference in the Assessment order of the AO regarding rejection of the Books

SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK,ROURKELA vs. ACIT, ROURKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

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

ITA 366/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

144. Therefore, it is sine qua non that the AO come to a conclusion that Books of Accounts maintained by the assessee are incorrect or incomplete or unreliable and rejects the books of Accounts before proceeding to make his own assessment. In instant case, there is no reference in the Assessment order of the AO regarding rejection of the Books

ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. NEELACHAL GRAMYA BANK, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection

ITA 58/CTK/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jul 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mohapatra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 22Section 36Section 44ASection 80PSection 80P(4)

disallowable under the said Section 36(l)(viia)(a) to be Rs. NIL. [NB: Although there appears to be no specific column in Form 3CD relating to Section 44AB towards the same, the Appellant is presumably referring to the clausel7(k) where against the entry head "Particular of any liability of a contingent nature" the Appellant has C.O. No. 13/CT

MAHANADI METAL AND CHEMICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. ITO, WARD-1, ROURKELA

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

ITA 496/CTK/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.496/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010 - 2011) M/S Mahanadi Metal & Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Rourkela Chemicals Private Limited, T/4/26/Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaccm 4844 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Parimal Kumar Jain, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18/03/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of Cit(A), Sambalpur, Dated 04.09.2017 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. On The Fact & Under Circumstances Of The Case The Commissioner (Appeals) Was Not Justified In Holding The Nature Of Expenses Of S/ 957144 Under The Head Commission Instead Of Contract Work. (Para 4). 2. On The Fact & Under Circumstances Of The Case The Commissioner (Appeals) Erred In Understanding The Accounting Entry Of Discount Of Rs. 16,91,687 & Wrongly Treated The Bogus Sundry Creditor. (Para8) 3. On The Fact & Under Circumstances Of The Case The Commissioner (Appeals) Was Not Justified In Rejection Of Additional Evidence & Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 999390 For Non-Submission Of Vat Return, (Para-9) 4. On The Fact & Under Circumstances Of The Case The Commissioner (Appeals) Was Unjustified For Not Sending For Remand The Case & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.2799978. 2 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income

For Appellant: Shri Parimal Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 115JSection 194CSection 194HSection 40Section 40A(3)

disallowance of Rs. 999390 for non-submission of Vat return, (para-9) 4. On the fact and under circumstances of the case the commissioner (appeals) was unjustified for not sending for remand the case and confirming the addition of Rs.2799978. 2 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 21.01.2011 declaring income from

DCIT, ROURKELA vs. SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR AHLUWALIA, SUNDERGARH

In the result, appeal of the department is allowed and that of the

ITA 63/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT, DR

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 14ASection 153A

section 246A of the Act alongwith the proposition laid down by various High Courts, as respectfully noted above, it is clear that when the assessee, during the assessment proceedings, has agreed to a particular addition, then he cannot be held aggrieved by such addition or disallowance, enabling him to file appeal before the ld CIT(A) u/s.250

M/S. BAJRANGBALI STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD,ROURKLA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 109/CTK/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.31 To 33/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017 To 2018-2019) M/S Bee Pee Rollers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3593 P & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.34 To 39/Ctk/2022 & आयकर अऩीऱ/Ita No.109/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2017 To 2020-2021) M/S Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Ltd., Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3594 L & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.40 To 44/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2018-2019) M/S Bajrangbali Re-Rollers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aaccb 6678 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Shri B.K. Tibrewal, Ca & Ms. Nisha Rachh, Ca Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr.Cit(Osd) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate with Shri

Section 133ASection 153ASection 292CSection 69Section 69C

disallowance resulting 5 IT(SS)A No.31-44/CTK/2022 & ITA No.109/CTK/2022 in addition to income made for Rs.19,39,60,866/-, is directed to be deleted.” The ITAT by its judgment dated 16th May, 2014 relied on the selfsame reasoning and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. Likewise, the High Court by the impugned judgment dated 5th July, 2017, affirmed the judgments