GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

201 (SC). I.T.A. Nos.: 436 & 437/CTK/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Gram Vikas Trust. Ground No. 4: The AO erred in levying interest under section 234B and C of the Act. Ground No. 5: Even otherwise since the delay in filing Form 10 is condonable one, (vide Board’s Circular No. 273 dt. 3/6/1980) Assessing Officer ought

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

201 (SC). I.T.A. Nos.: 436 & 437/CTK/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Gram Vikas Trust. Ground No. 4: The AO erred in levying interest under section 234B and C of the Act. Ground No. 5: Even otherwise since the delay in filing Form 10 is condonable one, (vide Board’s Circular No. 273 dt. 3/6/1980) Assessing Officer ought

SHRI PURNA CHANDRA DAS,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), BHUBANESWAR

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year : 2013-2014

201 4 further relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt Ltd., in ITA 519/2015 order dated 14.10.2015, wherein, it is held that failure by the AO to issue a notice to the assessee under section 143(2) of the Act pursuant to notice

DCIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee and revenue are dismissed

reassessment proceedings for non-deduction of TDS on payments made to non-resident by the assessee for import of goods and also notice u/s.148 of the Act, dated 29.3.2014 and u/s.142(1) of the Act dated 23.05.2014 were issued to the assessee. In compliance, Office Manager (F&A) appeared on behalf of the assessee and case was discussed and filed

PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee and revenue are dismissed

reassessment proceedings for non-deduction of TDS on payments made to non-resident by the assessee for import of goods and also notice u/s.148 of the Act, dated 29.3.2014 and u/s.142(1) of the Act dated 23.05.2014 were issued to the assessee. In compliance, Office Manager (F&A) appeared on behalf of the assessee and case was discussed and filed

PARADEEP PARIVAHAN PVT. LTD.,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011

201 1 income at Rs.2,09,81,460/-. Against the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A) and during pendency of appeal the AO issued notice u/.s.148 of the Act for initiating reassessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act by recording the following reasons: “The expenses “donation” is not an allowable expenses u/s.37 of the Income

METRO PROJECT,KEONJHAR vs. ITO, KEONJHAR WARD, KEONJHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2009-2010

201 0 3. That, the learned CIT (A) has committed serious error in not quashing the assessment order as the reason mentioned for reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act is not coming within the meaning of section u/s 147 of the Act and for which the notice u/s 148 of the Act is illegal and the assessment order

M/S. MAA TARINI INDUSTRIES LTD.,SUNDARGARH vs. PR. CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-2015

section 263 of the Act, therefore, it cannot be alleged that the order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice. However, Ld CIT DR, in all fairness, submitted that in pursuance to the impugned revisional order u/s.263 of the Act, the AO has passed the reassessment order after allowing due opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, no prejudice

SRI RABINDRA NATH PRADHAN,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2010-2011

reassessment so passed by the AO u/s.147/143(3) of the Act is without jurisdiction and without the P a g e 1 | 7 ITA No. 490/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year: 20 10- 201 1 authority of law, as such the same is liable to be quashed in the interest of justice. 3. Ld A.R. submitted that the reopening

M/S. EZMA FOUNDATION,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION CIRCLE), BHUBANESWAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

201, Form 10 may be furnished before the assessing authority completes the concerned 4 assessment. There is no specific bar prohibiting the assessee from modifying the figure of accumulation. ii) Association of Corporation & Apex Societies of Handlooms Vs. ADIT, [2013] ITR 287 (Delhi) : Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 17 of the Income-Tax Rules

THE BERHAMPUR CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

201 1 different provisions but while computing the total income, the assessee has added to total income the provisions made for NPA and standard assets of Rs.5,15,000/- but has not considered for addition of other provisions of Rs.30,50,000/-. Since the addition was not made in the original assessment due to oversight, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment

EARTH CRAFT LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-2013

201 3 advance to landlord is a current assets which is capital in nature instead of a revenue expenditure and hence, section 40A(3) of the Act is not applicable to the assessee company. The Assessing Officer did not find the explanation of the assessee satisfactory because the AO found that on enquiry from the Indusind bank, it is found

NILACHAL BUILD-TECH & RESORTS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

201 2 point out that the reasons to believe as recorded in the reasons do not warrant reopening before the reassessment proceedings are commenced. The Assessing Officer disposes of these objections and if satisfied with the objections, then the impugned reopening notice under Section

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. S.M.CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

section 11 of the Act to the appellant. The Hon’ble Tribunal affirmed the order of the CIT(Appeals) directing A.O. to allow exemption u/s.11 and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue vide the above oder. For the previous year relevant to the A.Y. 2009-10, under consideration, the A.O. denied the exemption claimed u/s.ll in the year under consideration

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. S.M.CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

section 11 of the Act to the appellant. The Hon’ble Tribunal affirmed the order of the CIT(Appeals) directing A.O. to allow exemption u/s.11 and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue vide the above oder. For the previous year relevant to the A.Y. 2009-10, under consideration, the A.O. denied the exemption claimed u/s.ll in the year under consideration

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. S.M.CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

section 11 of the Act to the appellant. The Hon’ble Tribunal affirmed the order of the CIT(Appeals) directing A.O. to allow exemption u/s.11 and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue vide the above oder. For the previous year relevant to the A.Y. 2009-10, under consideration, the A.O. denied the exemption claimed u/s.ll in the year under consideration

M/S- RAWAT BALAJI (JOINT VENTURE),JHARSUGUDA vs. PRILNCIPAL, CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

201 ITR 435 while interpreting the term 'work' u/s 194C of the Act had held that words any work' in section 194C{l) of the Act means any work including supply of labour to carry out work and is not intended to be confined to or restricted to works contract, therefore, a person who credits to the account

SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD,JHARSUGUDA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

201 ITR 435 while interpreting the term 'work' u/s 194C of the Act had held that words any work' in section 194C{l) of the Act means any work including supply of labour to carry out work and is not intended to be confined to or restricted to works contract, therefore, a person who credits to the account