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

reassessment was bad in law for failure to issue notice to the Assessee under section 143(2) of the Act?” The Hon’ble Orissa High Court is answering the question, held as follows: “”3. As far as Question No.(iii) is concerned , Mr. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department raises preliminary objection that this issue was not raised

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

reassessment in accordance with the law\nstated in these cases. Learned Counsel also relies on the case of Asstt.\nCIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2011] 197 taxmann.com\n202/[2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC) to assail reliance by the Revenue on\nthe opinion of Shah Commission so far as the alleged case of under-\ninvoicing is concerned. In that case

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

reassessment in accordance with the law\nstated in these cases. Learned Counsel also relies on the case of Asstt.\nCIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2011] 197 taxmann.com\n202/[2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC) to assail reliance by the Revenue on\nthe opinion of Shah Commission so far as the alleged case of under-\ninvoicing is concerned. In that case

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

reassessment in accordance with the law\nstated in these cases. Learned Counsel also relies on the case of Asstt.\nCIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2011] 197 taxmann.com\n202/[2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC) to assail reliance by the Revenue on\nthe opinion of Shah Commission so far as the alleged case of under-\ninvoicing is concerned. In that case

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

reassessment in accordance with the law\nstated in these cases. Learned Counsel also relies on the case of Asstt.\nCIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2011] 197 taxmann.com\n202/[2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC) to assail reliance by the Revenue on\nthe opinion of Shah Commission so far as the alleged case of under-\ninvoicing is concerned. In that case