M/S. ALTRADE MINERALS PVT. LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Altrade Minerals Pvt /S. Altrade Minerals Pvt Vs. Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of Ltd., C/O. Kadmawala & Co., C/O. Kadmawala & Co., Income Tax, Central Circle, Income Tax, Central Circle, C.A., C.A., Budhram Budhram Oram Oram Sambalpur Market, Market, Kachery Kachery Road, Road, Rourkela. Pan/Gir No. No.Aafca 7136 F (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.R.Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/20 024

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2006- 07 is also set aside and quashed. The application being G. A. No. 81 of 2010 is also allowed. 11. No order as to costs. [Copy Enclosed CLPB-2.Pg.Nos. P a g e 47 | 63 ITA No.65/CTK /2023 Assessment Year : 2011-12 (H').TIME LIMIT SPECIFIED U/S.124

THE KORAPUT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,JEYPORE, KORAPUT vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act, on 29.09.2021 assessing the total income at Rs. 14,80,76,031/-. 3. In the order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Act, dated 29.09.2021, the AO initiated the penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act and had levied penalty vide order dated 30.03.2022 at Rs.4,53,85,623/- being

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 petition was filed

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 petition was filed

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 petition was filed

SAMBIT RESORTS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

penalty proceedings are being initiated "for furnishing of inaccurate particular!!; or that for concealment of income." 12. For ready perusal, the notice issued by the AO u/s 271(l)(c) in both the assessment years is reproduced as under :- “Where in the course of proceedings before me for the assessment year 2005-06 & 2006-07 it appears to me that

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 petition was filed

PRAFULLA KUMAR ROUTRAY,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

143(3) of the Act, dated 06.05.2020. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that order dated 08.01.2025 as passed under Section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Kolkata-22 hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned CIT(Appeals)’ dismissing the appeal

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

143(3) of the Act. Further, there was no finding of the appellate authority that the transaction in breach of the aforesaid provisions made by the assessee was mala fide and with the sole object to conceal money. Consequently, penalty imposed under section 271D merely on technical mistake committed by the assessee, which had not resulted in any loss

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

143(3) of the Act. Further, there was no finding of the appellate authority that the transaction in breach of the aforesaid provisions made by the assessee was mala fide and with the sole object to conceal money. Consequently, penalty imposed under section 271D merely on technical mistake committed by the assessee, which had not resulted in any loss

SAMAPIKA JENA,ANGUL vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.53 To 57/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Ays. :2010-2011 & 2012-2013 To 2016-2017) Samapika Jena, Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack At-Plot No.3(P), Sector-1, Cda, Bidanasi, Cuttack-751014 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Akepj 7080 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 30.11.2018 For The Assessment Years 2010-2011 To 2013-2014 & 2015-2016. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical To Each Other, Except Different In Figure, Therefore, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, All The Appeals Are Heard Analogously & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Into Consideration The Facts & Grounds Mentioned In Ita No.53/Ctk/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 For Deciding All 2

143/- for A.Y.2012-2013, Rs.14,210/- for A.Y.2013-2014 and Rs.14,476/- for A.Y.2015-2016, respectively. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the penalty order, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), however, the CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and findings of AO, upheld the penalty so levied by the AO u/s.271(1

SAMAPIKA JENA,ANGUL vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.53 To 57/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Ays. :2010-2011 & 2012-2013 To 2016-2017) Samapika Jena, Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack At-Plot No.3(P), Sector-1, Cda, Bidanasi, Cuttack-751014 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Akepj 7080 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 30.11.2018 For The Assessment Years 2010-2011 To 2013-2014 & 2015-2016. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical To Each Other, Except Different In Figure, Therefore, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, All The Appeals Are Heard Analogously & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Into Consideration The Facts & Grounds Mentioned In Ita No.53/Ctk/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 For Deciding All 2

143/- for A.Y.2012-2013, Rs.14,210/- for A.Y.2013-2014 and Rs.14,476/- for A.Y.2015-2016, respectively. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the penalty order, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), however, the CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and findings of AO, upheld the penalty so levied by the AO u/s.271(1

SAMAPIKA JENA,ANGUL vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.53 To 57/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Ays. :2010-2011 & 2012-2013 To 2016-2017) Samapika Jena, Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack At-Plot No.3(P), Sector-1, Cda, Bidanasi, Cuttack-751014 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Akepj 7080 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 30.11.2018 For The Assessment Years 2010-2011 To 2013-2014 & 2015-2016. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical To Each Other, Except Different In Figure, Therefore, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, All The Appeals Are Heard Analogously & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Into Consideration The Facts & Grounds Mentioned In Ita No.53/Ctk/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 For Deciding All 2

143/- for A.Y.2012-2013, Rs.14,210/- for A.Y.2013-2014 and Rs.14,476/- for A.Y.2015-2016, respectively. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the penalty order, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), however, the CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and findings of AO, upheld the penalty so levied by the AO u/s.271(1

SAMAPIKA JENA,ANGUL vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.53 To 57/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Ays. :2010-2011 & 2012-2013 To 2016-2017) Samapika Jena, Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack At-Plot No.3(P), Sector-1, Cda, Bidanasi, Cuttack-751014 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Akepj 7080 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 30.11.2018 For The Assessment Years 2010-2011 To 2013-2014 & 2015-2016. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical To Each Other, Except Different In Figure, Therefore, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, All The Appeals Are Heard Analogously & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Into Consideration The Facts & Grounds Mentioned In Ita No.53/Ctk/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 For Deciding All 2

143/- for A.Y.2012-2013, Rs.14,210/- for A.Y.2013-2014 and Rs.14,476/- for A.Y.2015-2016, respectively. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the penalty order, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), however, the CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and findings of AO, upheld the penalty so levied by the AO u/s.271(1

SAMAPIKA JENA,ANGUL vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.53 To 57/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Ays. :2010-2011 & 2012-2013 To 2016-2017) Samapika Jena, Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack At-Plot No.3(P), Sector-1, Cda, Bidanasi, Cuttack-751014 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Akepj 7080 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Consolidated Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 30.11.2018 For The Assessment Years 2010-2011 To 2013-2014 & 2015-2016. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical To Each Other, Except Different In Figure, Therefore, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, All The Appeals Are Heard Analogously & Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Into Consideration The Facts & Grounds Mentioned In Ita No.53/Ctk/2019 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 For Deciding All 2

143/- for A.Y.2012-2013, Rs.14,210/- for A.Y.2013-2014 and Rs.14,476/- for A.Y.2015-2016, respectively. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the penalty order, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A), however, the CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and findings of AO, upheld the penalty so levied by the AO u/s.271(1

VAIBHAV RAONKA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-4(1), BHUBANESWAR

Bench: S/Shri Shrichandra Mohan Garg, Judicial

143 ii) CIT vs SSA’s Emerald Meadows, 73 Taxmann.com 248 (SC) iii) CIT vs Shree Bajrang Trading & Supply Co, 187 ITR 299 (Cal) iv) CIT vs Anwar Ali (1970) 76 ITR 696 (SC0 V) Madhushree Gupta vs Union of India & Anr, 317 ITR 107( Del) vi) Samapika jena vs ACIT, in ITA Nos.53 to 57/CTK/2019 order dated

VAIBHAV RAONKA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-4(1), BHUBANESWAR

Bench: S/Shri Shrichandra Mohan Garg, Judicial

143 ii) CIT vs SSA’s Emerald Meadows, 73 Taxmann.com 248 (SC) iii) CIT vs Shree Bajrang Trading & Supply Co, 187 ITR 299 (Cal) iv) CIT vs Anwar Ali (1970) 76 ITR 696 (SC0 V) Madhushree Gupta vs Union of India & Anr, 317 ITR 107( Del) vi) Samapika jena vs ACIT, in ITA Nos.53 to 57/CTK/2019 order dated

VAIBHAV RAONKA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-4(1), BHUBANESWAR

Bench: S/Shri Shrichandra Mohan Garg, Judicial

143 ii) CIT vs SSA’s Emerald Meadows, 73 Taxmann.com 248 (SC) iii) CIT vs Shree Bajrang Trading & Supply Co, 187 ITR 299 (Cal) iv) CIT vs Anwar Ali (1970) 76 ITR 696 (SC0 V) Madhushree Gupta vs Union of India & Anr, 317 ITR 107( Del) vi) Samapika jena vs ACIT, in ITA Nos.53 to 57/CTK/2019 order dated

ACIT,CIRCLE-1(!), SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. TRL KROSAKI REFRACTORIES LIMITED, JHARSUGUDHA

In the result, appeals of the revenue for the assessment years 2010-

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita No.260 260/Ctk/2020: Assessment Year Assessment Year :2010-2011

u/s 271. By issuing such notices, the assessment order becomes final. Various courts have held that such assessment orders to be null and void ab- initio. We have carefully considered the submission and case laws relied. In all the case laws relied on by the assessee, the common mistake made by the AO in those assessments were that AO passed