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

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

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

36(l)(viia)(a) of the I.T.Act. 8. Further, as nothing is disallowable u/s.36(1)(viia)(a) of the Act in the Assessment Year 2008-09,, in the Tax Audit Report u/s.44AB of the Act for the said year, the amount disallowable under the said section

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR vs. THE KORAPUT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD, JEYPORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.289/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Acit, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur Vs The Koraput Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Jeypore, Dabbuguda, Koraput Pan No. : Aaaat 2619 K & Cross Objection No.05/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) The Koraput Central Cooperative Vs Acit, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur Bank Limited, Jeypore, Dabbuguda, Koraput Pan No. : Aaaat 2619 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Rohit Kumar Singhania, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/11/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/11/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 17.05.2024, Passed In Appeal No.Nfac/2014-15/10211783 Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064953497(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Assessee Has Also Filed Cross Objection. 2. The Revenue In Its Appeal Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 1) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Cit(A) Is Justified In Modifying The Computation By Allowing The Deduction Of Rs 15,42,35,031/- U/S 36(1)(Viia) Of The Act Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Has Claimed Deduction U/S 36(1)(Visa) Of The Act Of Rs.5,82,04,860/- Only While Filing Its Return Of Income & Accordingly Deduction U/S 36(1)(Viia) Of The Act Should Be Restricted To The Actual Claim Of The Assessee Or As Per The Definition Of "Provision Of Bad & Doubtful Debts"

disallowance the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who allowed part relief to the assessee and allowed the provisions of bad & doubtful debts at Rs.15,42,35,031/- as against Rs.7,11,13,640/- allowed by the AO based on the calculation done in terms of the provisions of Section 36(1)(viia

THE BALASORE BHADRAK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,BALASORE vs. JCIT, BALASORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

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

disallow the provision for NPA of Rs.2,43,94,237/- in place of Rs.2,45,59,609/-“ 19. The assessee in its written submission has only stated that the CIT(A) failed to discuss newly introduced amendment to section 36(1)(viia

BAITARANI GRAMYA BANK,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BALASORE

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

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

36(1)(viia) of the Act. Further no material has also been brought before us to show that the provision of Rs.1,68,13,000/- made by the assessee exceeds the qualifying amount mentioned in the said section. We, therefore, delete the disallowance

M/S. GRID CORPORATION OF ORISSA LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT-(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2009-2010 2010 Grid Corporation Of Orissa Grid Corporation Of Orissa Vs. Acit (Tds), Acit (Tds), Ltd., Ltd., Gridco Gridco House, House, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcg 5398 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Ved Jain/P.Venugopal Rao /P.Venugopal Rao, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 12.7.2019 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.0035/17-18 For The Assessment Year The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, S/Shri Ved Jain & P.Venugopal Rao, Ld Ar Ld Ars Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

viia). Unless amount of bad and doubtful debts is debited to the provision for bad and doubtful debts account and the deduction admissible under section 36(1)(vii) is limited to the amount by which such debt or part thereof exceeds the credit balance in the provision for bad and doubtful debts account. The language and intention of the legislature

KENDRAPARA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KENDRAPADA vs. ACIT, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-10

section 36(1)(viia)(a) of the Act. Whereas the Assessing Officer perused the Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 10 provisions and came to the conclusion that the provisions of bad and doubtful debts in respect of scheduled bank or non-scheduled bank or co- operative bank is allowed 7.5% of total income and made a calculation at para

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

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

disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 10(46) of the Income tax Act has been made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), of Rs. 53,48,75,077/-. 3.2 This issue was not raised by the appellant before the Assessing Officer. However, before the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) the appellant has submitted that: “That, the appellant

ACIT, CUTTACK vs. M/S. CUTTACK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs.1,75,88,797/-, it was submitted by ld. AR that the Assessee bank is entitled for additional 10% deduction along with 7.5% calculated by the AO under provisions of Section 36(1)(viia

M/S. CUTTACK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs.1,75,88,797/-, it was submitted by ld. AR that the Assessee bank is entitled for additional 10% deduction along with 7.5% calculated by the AO under provisions of Section 36(1)(viia

ACIT, CUTTACK vs. M/S. CUTTACK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs.1,75,88,797/-, it was submitted by ld. AR that the Assessee bank is entitled for additional 10% deduction along with 7.5% calculated by the AO under provisions of Section 36(1)(viia

ACIT, CUTTACK vs. M/S. CUTTACK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs.1,75,88,797/-, it was submitted by ld. AR that the Assessee bank is entitled for additional 10% deduction along with 7.5% calculated by the AO under provisions of Section 36(1)(viia

M/S. CUTTACK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs.1,75,88,797/-, it was submitted by ld. AR that the Assessee bank is entitled for additional 10% deduction along with 7.5% calculated by the AO under provisions of Section 36(1)(viia

M/S. CUTTACK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs.1,75,88,797/-, it was submitted by ld. AR that the Assessee bank is entitled for additional 10% deduction along with 7.5% calculated by the AO under provisions of Section 36(1)(viia

ACIT, BALASORE vs. M/S. THE BALASORE BHADRAK CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., BALASORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-12

36(l)(viia) is a notional deduction, which is within the limits of the said section. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition." ITA No. 422/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year : 20 11- 12 We find that the facts of the instant case being similar with that of The Gurdaspur Central Co-op Circle, Pathankot Bank Ltd. (Supra

M/S. THE MAYURBHANJ CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. DCIT, BALASORE

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

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

36(l)(viia) is a notional deduction, which is within the limits of the said section. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition." ITA No. 393/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year : 20 11- 201 2 We find that the facts of the instant case being similar with that of The Gurdaspur Central Co-op Circle, Pathankot Bank Ltd. (Supra

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ASST. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAMBALPUR vs. SHREE BALAJI ENGICON LIMITED, BELPAHAR RS

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed