SRI PRATAP CHANDRA TRIPATHY,GANJAM vs. ITO, WARD-1, GANJAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.731/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-2017) Vs Ito, Ward-1, Berhampmur, Ganjam Sri Pratap Chandra Tripathy, Braja Nagar, 1St Lane, Lochapada Road, Berhampur, Ganjam-760001 Pan No. :Acfpt 5072 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 17/02/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/02/2026

reassessment proceedings was granted by Commissioner after expiry of 3 years from end of relevant assessment year, said approval should have been granted by Principal Chief Commissioner, thus, impugned order passed under section 148A

SHREE PRASAD JEWELLERS,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ROURKELA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.177/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Shree Prasad Jewellers, Vs Ito, Ward-1, Rourkela Sai Bihar, Sundargarh-770001 Pan No. :Abgfs 9081 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agarwalla, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 18.09.2025 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. At The Outset, We Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Delayed By 10 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Of Application Along With Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay, Which Are Not Found To Be False. Ld. Sr. Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 10 Days Delay & Proceed To Dispose Off The Appeal. 3. The Ld. Ar During The Course Of Hearing Submitted A Chart Stating Therein The Surviving Period Of Notice Issued U/S.148 Of The Act & Submitted That As Per The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case

Section 148A(b) of the new reassessment regime, the notice itself is liable to be quashed so also the assessment

SANKAR PATRO,GANJAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BERHAMPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

148A(b) two weeks time to file objection. Time available with AO to 18.08. 11.08.2022 --- issue notice u/s. 148 under 2022 new regime Actual date of issue of -- 23.08.2022 Notice notice u/s. 148 under new attached regime Page-7 to 12 Whether time barred? -- Notice time Notice barred u/s.148 is time barred by 12 days 3. The notice

S.B. COMBINE,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar

reassessment relates to A.Y. 2015-16 and 148 notice was issued on 1.4.2021 without complying the newly amended provisions of section 148 and 148A

S.B. COMBINE,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar

reassessment relates to A.Y. 2015-16 and 148 notice was issued on 1.4.2021 without complying the newly amended provisions of section 148 and 148A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. RAJENDRA PRASAD GUPTA, ROURKELA

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

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2013-14 Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of Vs. Rajendra Rajendra Prasad Prasad Gupta, Gupta, Income Tax, Central Cir Income Tax, Central Circle, 1/15, 1/15, Civil Civil Township, Township, Sambalpur Rourkela-769004 769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Abdpg 9284 G (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : Shri Firoze Andhyarujina, Nikhil Jangid & Sudarshan Firoze Andhyarujina, Nikhil Jangid & Sudarshan Padhi, Advs Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/9/202 24 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/9/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

148A of the Act as inserted by Finance Act, 2021 in accordance with the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court by its order dated 04.05.2022 in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal case (2022 SSC Online SC 543). In view of the specific provisions of section 153(6) of the Act, all the cases reopened u/s 147/148

PURUSHOTTAM DAYAL TULSHYAN,SAMBALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.50/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Purushottam Dayal Tulshyan, Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Sambalpur Khetrajpur, Balmukund Dora Lane, Sambalpur-768003 Pan No. :Aakpt 1711 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/07/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit, Sambalpur Passed U/S.263 Of The Act, Dated 18.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 31.12.2015. Thereafter The Case Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S.148 Of The Act Dated 31.03.2021 & The Reassessment Order Was Passed U/S.147 R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 28.03.2022. Thereafter The Ld. Pr.Cit, Sambalpur Found The Said Order Erroneous As Well As Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Revised The Said Order Wherein He Has Enhanced The Income Of The Assessee By Rs.4,02,90,000/- On Account Of Addition U/S.68 Of The Act. Against The Said Order, The Assessee Is In Present Appeal Before Us.

Section 148A of the Act came into force according to which no notice u/s.148 of the Act could be issued without passing of the order u/s.148A (d) of the Act. This being so, in our considered opinion, the reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JHARSUGUDA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, JHARSUGUDA vs. HIRAKHAND TRANSPORT AND MULTI PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., BRAJARAJ NAGAR

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.282/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Vs Hirakhand Transport & Multi Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q & प्रत्याक्षेऩ सं/Cross Objection No.04/Ctk/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.282/Ctk/2024) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Hirakhand Transport & Multi Vs Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Agrawala, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/09/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15.05.2024, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1064895008(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

148A(b) dated 02.06.2022 demonstrates acceptance of the case by the department being not a fit case to proceed further and hence no order u/s 147 was issued. Keeping the order u/s 147 alive which has become infructuous, is bad in law. 10. For that provisions of section 40A(2)(b) are not applicable to cooperative societies

SHREE DEOSHARWALI OIL INDUSTRIES,GOVINDPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD BARGARH, BSF NAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2018-2019 2019 Shree Shree Deosharwali Deosharwali Oil Oil Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Income Tax Officer, Ward Industries, Industries, Salepali Salepali Bargarh, Bsf Nagar. Nh Bargarh, Bsf Nagar. Nh Govindpur, Bargarh Govindpur, Bargarh Street, Bandu Vikira Chowk, Street, Bandu Vikira Chowk, 1St Floor, Bargarh Floor, Bargarh Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Acbfs 4179 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ca Sunil Surana, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/0 07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/0 /07/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

148A(d) and 148 were without jurisdiction and therefore, the entire reassessment is bad in law. 2. For that the ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of reopening when notice u/s.148A(b) is bad in law since it provided less than 7 days to comply and therefore, the entire assessment is bad in law. 3. For that