SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASST.CIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN,SHELTER SQUARE,

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

u/s 271 DA, for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20, the appeals were not filed before the ld CIT(A) within the due date, therefore, there was delay of 430 days in both the years. 12. In regard to penalty orders, it was submitted by ld AR that the assessee has filed condonation

SAHOO DIOSTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

u/s 271 DA, for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20, the appeals were not filed before the ld CIT(A) within the due date, therefore, there was delay of 430 days in both the years. 12. In regard to penalty orders, it was submitted by ld AR that the assessee has filed condonation

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

u/s 271 DA, for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20, the appeals were not filed before the ld CIT(A) within the due date, therefore, there was delay of 430 days in both the years. 12. In regard to penalty orders, it was submitted by ld AR that the assessee has filed condonation

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASST,CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , AAYAKAR BHAWAN

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

u/s 271 DA, for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20, the appeals were not filed before the ld CIT(A) within the due date, therefore, there was delay of 430 days in both the years. 12. In regard to penalty orders, it was submitted by ld AR that the assessee has filed condonation

SAHOO DISTRIBNUTORS (P) LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

u/s 271 DA, for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20, the appeals were not filed before the ld CIT(A) within the due date, therefore, there was delay of 430 days in both the years. 12. In regard to penalty orders, it was submitted by ld AR that the assessee has filed condonation

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

u/s 271 DA, for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20, the appeals were not filed before the ld CIT(A) within the due date, therefore, there was delay of 430 days in both the years. 12. In regard to penalty orders, it was submitted by ld AR that the assessee has filed condonation

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), , BHUBANEWSWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

penalty u/s.272A(1)(d) of the Act. 6. ITA No.504/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A),NFAC/2021-22/10384315 for the assessment year 2022-23 in the matter of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. 7. Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri

NIROD KUMAR SAHOO,MEENABAZAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,DHENKANAL WARD,DHENKANAL, DHENKANAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialassessment Year : 2012-13 Nirod Kumar Sahoo, Nirod Kumar Sahoo, Meena Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bazar, Dhenkanal Bazar, Dhenkanal-759001 Dhenkanal Dhenkanal Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Ahups 4395 K (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Adv Natabar Panda, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/0 04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 02/0 /04/2024

delay of 152 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal disposed of on merits. 5. It was submitted by ld AR that the appeal is against the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act by the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that there was survey on the premises of the assessee and consequently, assessment came

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

penalties were levied by the ACIT,\nRourkela Circle u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide even dated 30.09.2016\nfor A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11.\n2. At the outset, we observe from the appeal folder that there is a delay\nof 4 days in filing the appeal by the department and in support of this\na condonation

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

penalties were levied by the ACIT,\nRourkela Circle u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide even dated 30.09.2016\nfor A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11.\n2. At the outset, we observe from the appeal folder that there is a delay\nof 4 days in filing the appeal by the department and in support of this\na condonation

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

penalties were levied by the ACIT,\nRourkela Circle u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide even dated 30.09.2016\nfor A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11.\n2. At the outset, we observe from the appeal folder that there is a delay\nof 4 days in filing the appeal by the department and in support of this\na condonation