ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. KALINGA INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY (KIIT), BHUBANESWAR
In the result, appeals of the assessee i
ITA 108/CTK/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Aug 2017AY 2004-05
Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.266, 162&217/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-07&2005-06) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.108&294/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05&2006-07) Acit, Circle-2(2), Vs. Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Bhubaneswar, Odisha Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.27&42/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-05 & 2006-07) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh,Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: & Co No.42&27/Ctk/2014 These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue
For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh,CITDR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 254
section 147 of the Act as there was no fresh materials available on record and all the seized materials have been considered in the assessment proceedings u/s.153A. Therefore, your honour had not applied your judicious mind before recording of the reasons for reopening of the case for reassessment. Hence, the issuance of notice is not sustainable in law.”
6. Ld.DR