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.

56 results for “disallowance”+ Section 70clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,155Delhi1,775Chennai536Bangalore386Jaipur365Ahmedabad336Hyderabad322Kolkata281Chandigarh203Pune177Raipur137Indore134Cochin130Surat117Rajkot89Visakhapatnam70Amritsar69Nagpur61Cuttack56Lucknow54Allahabad45Ranchi44Jodhpur37SC35Guwahati26Dehradun21Patna21Agra18Panaji8Varanasi8Jabalpur7

Key Topics

Section 801A63Section 12A42Section 26340Disallowance37Section 14727Addition to Income27Deduction22Section 143(3)21Section 11(2)16Section 40

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

ITA 437/CTK/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

70,633/- after adjustment of TDS refund claim for that year of ₹ 12,047/- due to failure to file Form No. 10 within the due date of filing the return of income as required u/s 139(1) of the Act. It was submitted that the delay in uploading Form No. 10 cannot lead to disallowance of the amount actually

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3

14
Section 153A11
Exemption11

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

ITA 436/CTK/2024[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

70,633/- after adjustment of TDS refund claim for that year of ₹ 12,047/- due to failure to file Form No. 10 within the due date of filing the return of income as required u/s 139(1) of the Act. It was submitted that the delay in uploading Form No. 10 cannot lead to disallowance of the amount actually

MGM GREEN ENERGY LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 370/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.370/Ctk/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) Mgm Green Energy Limited, Vs Jcit, Range Rourkela, Rourkela 5-A, Forest Park, Bhubaneswar Pan No. :Aahcm 8472 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Sh A.K.Sabat & Sh B.K.Mahapatra, Cas राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1. Bhubaneswar, Dated 11.06.2019, In I.T.Appeal No.0388/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Assessee Has Taken As Many As Six Grounds Of Appeal, Relating To Various Additions/Disallowances Made To The Income Declared By The Assessee & Also Against The Adjustments Made In The Book Profit U/S.115Jb Of The Act. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- I) The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee, Which Is Arbitrary, Erroneous & Bad, Both In The Eyes Of Law. Ii) Disallowance Of Interest Expenses U/S.36(Iii) Of The Act At Rs.1,65,18,400/-; Iii) Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.14A Of The Act/Rule 8D Of It Rules At Rs.2,44,82,488/-; Iv) Addition Of Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.14A At Rs.2,44,82,488/- In The Book Profit As Computed U/S 115Jb; V) Addition/Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.115Jb Of The Act Under The Book Profits; Vi) Disallowance Of Differential Depreciation Of Rs.1,16,63,697/-

For Appellant: Sh A.K.Sabat & Sh B.K.Mahapatra, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 123Section 14ASection 2Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

70,18,394 – 87,24,94,954) and compute the amount of disallowance of interest paid on this amount. Needless to say, at the time of making such computation and disallowance, an opportunity of being heard be allowed to the assessee. This ground of appeal is partly allowed. Ground No.(iii) : Disallowance of Expenses u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D 15. Brief facts

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 218/CTK/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri B.R.Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

70,718/- being the amount disallowed u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source u/s.194C of the Act. Against the said penalty order, the assessee is in appeal before us taking the following grounds of appeal: P a g e 4 | 9 Assessment Year : 2014-15 “1. For that the exparte order of the forum

POOJA SPONGE PRAIVATE LIMITED,SUNDARGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL, SAMBALPUR

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

ITA 107/CTK/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2015-16 Pooja Pooja Sponge Sponge Private Private Vs. Acit, Central, Sambalpur Acit, Central, Sambalpur Limited., Idc, Plot No.214, Limited., Idc, Plot No.214, Kalunga, Rourkela. Kalunga, Rourkela. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaccp 9822 A (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bajoria, Ar A, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/01 /01/2023 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)-2, Bhubaneswar, 2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 23.3.2022 In Appeal No. In Appeal No. 2/10592/2017-18 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Shri K.K.Bajoria, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri K.K.Bajoria, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri K.K.Bajoria, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bajoria, AR a, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(3)Section 68

section 143(3) of the Act, on 31.12.2016 wherein, unsecured loans of the assessee to an extent of 31.12.2016 wherein, unsecured loans of the assessee to an extent of 31.12.2016 wherein, unsecured loans of the assessee to an extent of P a g e 1 | 3 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rs.5,70,70,110/- came to be disallowed

B.C. BHUYAN CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE- 1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 356/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalwalassessment Year : 2014-15 B.C.Bhuyan Construction Pvt B.C.Bhuyan Construction Pvt Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle Dcit, Corporate Circle - Ltd., Plot No.90, Palasuni, Ltd., Plot No.90, Palasuni, 1(1), Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aadcb 3304 N (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Adv Revenue By Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Pr. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/07 7/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /07/2023

For Appellant: Shri P.C.SethiFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

section 40A(3) included the labour payments, which had been disallowed by the Assessing Officer under the heads “bogus labour payment” to an extent of Rs.6,86,19,336/-. It was the submission that this amounts to double addition. It was the further submission that the Assessing Officer himself has accepted in page 18 of his order that the assessee

AKBARI CONTINENTAL PRIVATE LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), CUTTACK

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

ITA 364/CTK/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack17 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.364/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) वष"

Section 139(1)

disallowance of Rs.6,70,691/- made out of the employees contribution towards EPS and ESI. We find that this issue has already been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd., vs CIT in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022 in regard to issue of employees contribution to PF and ESI, which

MANORANJAN DASH,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO WARD 3(1), BHUBANESWAR

ITA 544/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 May 2025AY 2016-17
Section 250Section 69

70,055/- as undisclosed income under section 69 of the Income Tax Act due to the assessee's failure to provide corroborative evidence for construction expenditure. The assessee had entered into an agreement for construction of flats, bearing the entire expenditure for a developer share of 66.67%. The assessee failed to furnish details of construction expenditure, building sanction plan

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

SWASTHA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE,CUTTACK vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), CUTTACK

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 328/CTK/2023[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.324 To 328/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2007 04 To 2007-08 Swasthya Swasthya Bikash Bikash Samity, Samity, Vs. Ito (Exemption), Ito (Exemption), Scb Cb Medical Medical College College Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Hospital,Mangalabag, Hospital,Mangalabag, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaeas 5600 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None (Adjn Petition) : None (Adjn Petition) Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: None (Adjn petition)For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 11Section 12ASection 147

70 taxmann.com 7 (Pune - Trib.) that Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation is a 'State' and therefore payment to it could not be disallowed under section

SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE,CUTTACK vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), CUTTACK

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 325/CTK/2023[2004-05]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.324 To 328/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2007 04 To 2007-08 Swasthya Swasthya Bikash Bikash Samity, Samity, Vs. Ito (Exemption), Ito (Exemption), Scb Cb Medical Medical College College Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Hospital,Mangalabag, Hospital,Mangalabag, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaeas 5600 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None (Adjn Petition) : None (Adjn Petition) Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: None (Adjn petition)For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 11Section 12ASection 147

70 taxmann.com 7 (Pune - Trib.) that Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation is a 'State' and therefore payment to it could not be disallowed under section

SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE,CUTTACK vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), CUTTACK

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 326/CTK/2023[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.324 To 328/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2007 04 To 2007-08 Swasthya Swasthya Bikash Bikash Samity, Samity, Vs. Ito (Exemption), Ito (Exemption), Scb Cb Medical Medical College College Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Hospital,Mangalabag, Hospital,Mangalabag, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaeas 5600 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None (Adjn Petition) : None (Adjn Petition) Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: None (Adjn petition)For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 11Section 12ASection 147

70 taxmann.com 7 (Pune - Trib.) that Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation is a 'State' and therefore payment to it could not be disallowed under section

SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI SCB MIDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL,CUTTACK vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), CUTTACK

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 324/CTK/2023[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.324 To 328/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2007 04 To 2007-08 Swasthya Swasthya Bikash Bikash Samity, Samity, Vs. Ito (Exemption), Ito (Exemption), Scb Cb Medical Medical College College Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Hospital,Mangalabag, Hospital,Mangalabag, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaeas 5600 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None (Adjn Petition) : None (Adjn Petition) Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: None (Adjn petition)For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 11Section 12ASection 147

70 taxmann.com 7 (Pune - Trib.) that Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation is a 'State' and therefore payment to it could not be disallowed under section

SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE,CUTTACK vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), CUTTACK

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 327/CTK/2023[2006-07]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.324 To 328/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2007 04 To 2007-08 Swasthya Swasthya Bikash Bikash Samity, Samity, Vs. Ito (Exemption), Ito (Exemption), Scb Cb Medical Medical College College Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Aayakar Bhavan, Cuttack Hospital,Mangalabag, Hospital,Mangalabag, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaeas 5600 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None (Adjn Petition) : None (Adjn Petition) Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 06/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: None (Adjn petition)For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 11Section 12ASection 147

70 taxmann.com 7 (Pune - Trib.) that Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation is a 'State' and therefore payment to it could not be disallowed under section

M/S. CHANDAN TRANS-CONS PVT. LTD,ROURKELA vs. DCIT, ROURKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 15/CTK/2024[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack09 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.14 & 15 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009 09 & 2009-2010 M/S. Chandan Trans M/S. Chandan Trans-Cons Pvt Vs. Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Ltd., At-Ff/2, Civil Township, Ff/2, Civil Township, Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaccc 5185 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 194Section 201(1)Section 40

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% disallowance is liable to be made only in respect of Rs.2,70

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ROURKELA, ROURKELA ODISHA vs. CHANDAN TRANSCONS PVT LTD, ROURKELA ODISHA

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 340/CTK/2023[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack09 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.14 & 15 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009 09 & 2009-2010 M/S. Chandan Trans M/S. Chandan Trans-Cons Pvt Vs. Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Ltd., At-Ff/2, Civil Township, Ff/2, Civil Township, Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaccc 5185 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 194Section 201(1)Section 40

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% disallowance is liable to be made only in respect of Rs.2,70

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, ROURKELA, ROURKELA, ODISHA vs. CHANDAN TRANSCONS PRIVATE LIMITED, ROURKELA, ODISHA

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 339/CTK/2023[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack09 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.14 & 15 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009 09 & 2009-2010 M/S. Chandan Trans M/S. Chandan Trans-Cons Pvt Vs. Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Ltd., At-Ff/2, Civil Township, Ff/2, Civil Township, Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaccc 5185 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 194Section 201(1)Section 40

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% disallowance is liable to be made only in respect of Rs.2,70

M/S. CHANDAN TRANS-CONS PVT. LTD,ROURKELA vs. DCIT,ROURKELA CIRCLE, ROURKELA

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 14/CTK/2024[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack09 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.14 & 15 /Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009 09 & 2009-2010 M/S. Chandan Trans M/S. Chandan Trans-Cons Pvt Vs. Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Dcit, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Ltd., At-Ff/2, Civil Township, Ff/2, Civil Township, Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aaccc 5185 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 194Section 201(1)Section 40

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 30% disallowance is liable to be made only in respect of Rs.2,70

WOMEN ORGANISATION FOR SOCIO CULTURAL AWARNESS,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,EXEMPTIONS, CUTTACK

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

ITA 67/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 250

disallowed deduction of the whole of the amount of Rs. 9,58,96,328 applied in various projects and computed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 10,13,15,635 and raised a demand in the total amount of Rs. 6,99,70,607 in the Intimation under section

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

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

ITA 89/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

disallowance of claim of deduction of Rs. 47,15,405/- under section 801AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without properly appreciating the facts of the case and submission made before him. 4. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter and modify the grounds of appeal as taken by it. 3. The revenue in its appeal for A.Y.2011-2012