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

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

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 is not just and legal on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 2. For that the learned CIT(Appeals) without properly appreciating the facts and submissions of the appellant from

M/S. VINAYAK AGRO INDUSTRIES,ROURKELA vs. ITO WARD-4, ROURKELA

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.2. By the impugned Order the Ld.CIT (Appeals) has arbitrarily rejected the Appeal filed by the Appellant- against the Assessment Order dated 30- 12-2019 passed by Ld.ITO U/s 147/Section 143/Section 263 of the said Act. 1.3. The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Tractor Trolley Spring Leaf. The Appellant

M/S. VINAYAK AGRO INDUSTRIES,ROURKELA vs. ITO WARD-4, ROURKELA

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.2. By the impugned Order the Ld.CIT (Appeals) has arbitrarily rejected the Appeal filed by the Appellant- against the Assessment Order dated 30- 12-2019 passed by Ld.ITO U/s 147/Section 143/Section 263 of the said Act. 1.3. The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Tractor Trolley Spring Leaf. The Appellant