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.

32 results for “disallowance”+ Section 251clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,101Delhi931Bangalore318Chennai272Kolkata251Ahmedabad207Jaipur203Hyderabad180Pune159Cochin120Chandigarh99Indore93Surat84Raipur64Nagpur55Lucknow48Amritsar43Cuttack32Guwahati32Allahabad29Rajkot25Karnataka19Panaji19Visakhapatnam16Telangana10Jodhpur9Kerala8Ranchi8Jabalpur5Patna4Dehradun4Agra3SC3Varanasi2Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income21Section 4020Section 14716Disallowance16Section 143(3)8Section 906Section 145(3)6Section 143(2)5Deduction5Section 148

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-

ITA 173/CTK/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133BSection 144Section 250Section 40

disallowed u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act, ₹24,84,000/- as loss on sale of investment and ₹90,20,461/- as interest as income from other sources were added and the total income was computed at ₹3,33,86,590/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued several notices

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-

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

4
Section 143(1)4
Unexplained Cash Credit3
ITA 174/CTK/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133BSection 144Section 250Section 40

disallowed u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act, ₹24,84,000/- as loss on sale of investment and ₹90,20,461/- as interest as income from other sources were added and the total income was computed at ₹3,33,86,590/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued several notices

RUKMANI INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 358/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.358/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Rukmani Infra Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Plot No.251, District Centre, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar-16 Pan No. : Aaecr 1585 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None : Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam, Cit-Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Has Been Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 16.06.2017, For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Extracted From The Available Records Are That, The Assessee, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956, Engaged In The Business Of Erection, Commissioning, Technical & Maintenance Service To Different Power Plants. The Return Of Income For The Ay 2013-14 Was Filed By The Assessee On 01.10.2013 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,65,91,030/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) & 143(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. Assessment Proceedings Were Completed By The Ao & Concluded With An Addition Of Rs.3,58,95,574/- Under Four Different

For Appellant: None
Section 143(2)Section 68

disallowance of receipt of Rs.1,30,60,000/- by the assessee company towards share capital by treating the same as Income u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act by Ld AO. Ld DR brought to our attention the relevant paras of order of AO and CIT(A), also furnished before the bench his written submission having details of Mahabali Enclave

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. NATIONAL ALUMINIUM COMPANY LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 339/CTK/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.339 & 340/Ctk/2016 Dcit, Corporate Circle1(2)/ Vs. National Aluminium Company Acit, Circle-2(2), Limited, Bhubaneswar Nalco Bhavan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 7449 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.352 & 353/Ctk/2016 & Ita No.374/Ctk/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-11, 2012-13 & 2011-12) National Aluminium Company Vs. Jcit Range-2/ Limited, Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2) Nalco Bhavan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 7449 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.01/Ctk/2015 & 25/Ctk/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.376/Ctk/14 & Ita No.340/Ctk/2016) (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012 & 2012-2013) National Aluminium Company Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2)/ Limited, Dcit, Corporate Circle- Nalco Bhavan, P/1, Nayapalli, 1(2), Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 7449 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain/B.K.Mahapatra, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CIT DR
Section 14A

Section 14A r.w.rule 8D. Accordingly, we follow the ratio of judicial decision and restore this disputed issue to the file of the AO to re-examine and verify and apply the above provisions. This issue is allowed for statistical purposes. 18. Ground No.4 relates to addition under trial operation expenses. The AO has made the disallowance amounting to Rs.45

DCIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 70/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AR/P.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 251 of the Act. Being so, we cannot borrow support from the order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No 991/Hyd/2011-for AY 2006-07, on which reliance placed by the assessee's counsel in the present case, there is a categorical finding given by the CIT(A) that there are certain mines not yet commenced. On that mine closure

JCIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 69/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AR/P.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 251 of the Act. Being so, we cannot borrow support from the order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No 991/Hyd/2011-for AY 2006-07, on which reliance placed by the assessee's counsel in the present case, there is a categorical finding given by the CIT(A) that there are certain mines not yet commenced. On that mine closure

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 257/CTK/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AR/P.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 251 of the Act. Being so, we cannot borrow support from the order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No 991/Hyd/2011-for AY 2006-07, on which reliance placed by the assessee's counsel in the present case, there is a categorical finding given by the CIT(A) that there are certain mines not yet commenced. On that mine closure

ORISSA MINING CORPORATION LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 183/CTK/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AR/P.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 251 of the Act. Being so, we cannot borrow support from the order of the Tribunal passed in ITA No 991/Hyd/2011-for AY 2006-07, on which reliance placed by the assessee's counsel in the present case, there is a categorical finding given by the CIT(A) that there are certain mines not yet commenced. On that mine closure

SRI BADAL CHANDRA SENAPATI,BALASORE vs. ITO, WARD-2, BALASORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 422/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

section 251(2) has not been issued and served on the assessee. Therefore, the addition on account of enhancement of income of the assessee by Rs.3,73,10,850/- cannot be sustained in law. I, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and vacate the enhancement of disallowance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JHARSUGUDA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, JHARSUGUDA vs. HIRAKHAND TRANSPORT AND MULTI PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., BRAJARAJ NAGAR

ITA 282/CTK/2024[2015-2016]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack04 Sept 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.282/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Vs Hirakhand Transport & Multi Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q & प्रत्याक्षेऩ सं/Cross Objection No.04/Ctk/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.282/Ctk/2024) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Hirakhand Transport & Multi Vs Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Agrawala, Ca 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. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15.05.2024, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1064895008(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agrawala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 151(2)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

251(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 while enhancing the income of the Appellant to Rs. 46,64,000.00. 4. For that, for reopening beyond four years, prior approval as mandated under section 151(1) of the Income Tax Act (pre- amended), has not been obtained from PCIT / PCCIT. Rather it was obtained u/s 151(2) from JCIT

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. SRI SAI RAMESWARA SOLVENTS PVT. LTD., KORAPUT

In the result, appeals of the revenue in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 83/CTK/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) अऩीऱ सं/It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.24-26/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.27-29/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Jami Siva Sai, one of the directors of assesseeFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 153CSection 40A(3)

section 40A(3) and the details of such violation have been quantified in page no. 67,92 to 120 of the Appraisal report. The CIT(A) has not given cognizance to the finding contained in Appraisal report and annulled the assessment on the ground that seized material were not used for making assessment. (iii) Any other ground of appeal that

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. SRI SAI RAMESWARA SOLVENTS PVT. LTD., KORAPUT

In the result, appeals of the revenue in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 81/CTK/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) अऩीऱ सं/It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.24-26/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.27-29/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Jami Siva Sai, one of the directors of assesseeFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 153CSection 40A(3)

section 40A(3) and the details of such violation have been quantified in page no. 67,92 to 120 of the Appraisal report. The CIT(A) has not given cognizance to the finding contained in Appraisal report and annulled the assessment on the ground that seized material were not used for making assessment. (iii) Any other ground of appeal that

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. SRI SAI RAMESWARA SOLVENTS PVT. LTD., KORAPUT

In the result, appeals of the revenue in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 82/CTK/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) अऩीऱ सं/It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.24-26/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of It(Ss)A Nos.04-06/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & आयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) Acit, Central Circle-1, Vs M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aajcs 3201 K & Cross Objection Nos.27-29/Ctk/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.81-83/Ctk/2021) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 To 2015-2016) M/S Sri Sai Rameswara Solvents Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Pvt. Ltd., Bhadraya Street, Bhubaneswar Jeypore, Koraput-764001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Jami Siva Sai, one of the directors of assesseeFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 153CSection 40A(3)

section 40A(3) and the details of such violation have been quantified in page no. 67,92 to 120 of the Appraisal report. The CIT(A) has not given cognizance to the finding contained in Appraisal report and annulled the assessment on the ground that seized material were not used for making assessment. (iii) Any other ground of appeal that

ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. RAJDHANI SYSTEMS & ESTATES (P) LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 232/CTK/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.232&233/Ctk/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-2008 & 2008-2009) Acit, Circle-2(2), Bhubaneswar Vs. Rajdhani Systems &Estates (P) Ltd., A/170, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcr 8271 L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.253&254/Ctk/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-2008 & 2008-2009) Rajdhani Systems &Estates Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), (P) Ltd., A/170, Sahid Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No. : Aabcr 8271 L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Citdr निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri B.D.Ojha, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/09/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)-Ii, Bhubaneswar All Dated 01.02.2012 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. 2. Since The Issue & Facts Involved In These Appeals Are Interconnected, Therefore, They Are Being Heard & Disposed Off Together As Under.

For Appellant: Shri B.D.Ojha, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CITDR
Section 132

251/- for the assessment year 2008-09. 11. Ld. AR reiterated the submission made before the lower authorities. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the orders of authorities below. 12. We find that while deciding the similar issue in one of the group cases in case of Hi-tech Estates & Promoters Pvt. Ltd., in IT(SS)A No.03

INDIAN METALS AND FERRO ALLOYS LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DICT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 311/CTK/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(2)Section 154Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40

section 195 of the Act on payments made in foreign currency on certain imports and other expenditures and consequential disallowance u/s.40(a)(i) were not considered. The CIT(A) observed that in his opinion, the assessment was not reopened on mere change of opinion. According to him, only if on certain issues, the Assessing Officer has already taken a conscious

M/S. INDIAN METALS & FERRO ALLOYS LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 341/CTK/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(2)Section 154Section 195Section 195(1)Section 40

section 195 of the Act on payments made in foreign currency on certain imports and other expenditures and consequential disallowance u/s.40(a)(i) were not considered. The CIT(A) observed that in his opinion, the assessment was not reopened on mere change of opinion. According to him, only if on certain issues, the Assessing Officer has already taken a conscious

OM SRI NILAMADHAB BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 296/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack14 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.296/Ctk/2018 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Om Sri Nilamadhab Builders (P) Vs Ito, Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Ltd., Plot No.288, Bapuji Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751009 Pan No. :Aabco 2822 N (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/11/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 16.05.2018, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0330/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. This Appeal Had Originally Been Disposed Off By The Coordinate Bench Of This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 26.11.2019, Wherein It Was Held That The Amendment To Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act By The Finance Act (No.2) Act, 2014 Was Retrospective In Operation & The Disallowance On Account Of The Non-Deduction Of Tds Was Liable To Be Restricted To 30% As Against 100 Made By The Ao & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A). 3. The Revenue Had Filed A Miscellaneous Application Bearing M.A.No.06/Ctk/2020, Wherein The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Shree Choudhary Transport Company (2020) 426 Itr 289

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 40

251 (Delhi-Trib.), Smt. Sonu Khandelwal, ITA No.597/JP/2013, dated 13.05.2016, Singonahalli Chikkarevanna Gangadharaiah [2020] 116 taxmann.com 230 (Bang- Trib), Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd., ITA No.30-32/Gau/2015, dated 18.10.2019 as also in the case of Smt. Kanta Yadav, ITA No.6312/Del/2016, dated 12.05.2017, have categorically held that the amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Finance (No.2

KENDRAPADA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,KENDRAPADA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 376/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack15 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.376/Ctk/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Kendrapara Urban Co-Operative Vs Acit, Cir-1(2), Cuttack Bank Ltd., College Square, Tinimuhani, Kendrapara Pan No. :Aaatk 8347 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 27.03.2015, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.546/2011-12 For The Assessment Year 2011-2012. 2. This Appeal Had Originally Been Disposed Off By The Coordinate Bench Of This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 16.03.2020, Wherein It Was Held That The Amendment To Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act By The Finance Act (No.2) Act, 2014 Was Retrospective In Operation & The Disallowance On Account Of The Non-Deduction Of Tds Was Liable To Be Restricted To 30% As Against 100% Made By The Ao & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A). 3. The Revenue Had Filed A Miscellaneous Application Bearing M.A.No.39/Ctk/2021, Wherein The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Shree Choudhary Transport Company (2020) 426 Itr 289

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 40

251 (Delhi-Trib.), Smt. Sonu Khandelwal, ITA No.597/JP/2013, dated 13.05.2016, Singonahalli Chikkarevanna Gangadharaiah [2020] 116 taxmann.com 230 (Bang- Trib), Tripura State Electricity Corporation Ltd., ITA No.30-32/Gau/2015, dated 18.10.2019 as also in the case of Smt. Kanta Yadav, ITA No.6312/Del/2016, dated 12.05.2017, have categorically held that the amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Finance (No.2

SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR AGARWALA,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 189/CTK/2023[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack13 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.189 & 190/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Santosh Kumar Santosh Kumar Agarwala, Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-2(1), Sector-6, Cda, Cuttack 6, Cda, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaspa 3698Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth Mohit Sheth, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr , Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/07 7/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/0 /07/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Mohit ShethFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 148

disallowance only on the ground that it is a fresh claim and as it is noticed that the assessee has filed return in respect to notice u/s.148 and therefore, the return filed is deemed to be filed under section 139 of the Act and the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of interest on housing loan paid to the extent

SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR AGARWALA,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 190/CTK/2023[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack13 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.189 & 190/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Santosh Kumar Santosh Kumar Agarwala, Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-2(1), Sector-6, Cda, Cuttack 6, Cda, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaspa 3698Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth Mohit Sheth, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr , Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/07 7/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/0 /07/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Mohit ShethFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 148

disallowance only on the ground that it is a fresh claim and as it is noticed that the assessee has filed return in respect to notice u/s.148 and therefore, the return filed is deemed to be filed under section 139 of the Act and the assessee is entitled to claim deduction of interest on housing loan paid to the extent