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

section 80-IA(4) of the Act in respect of the development of eligible infrastructural facilities. 41 ITA Nos.193-195/CTK/2019 19. Ld. AR also pointed out that the assessee was assigned full responsibility to do all acts for execution and completion of work right from the beginning till handing over of the project to the contractee. The contract

M/S- SBEP-GRIL(JOINT VENTURE),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

section 80-IA(4) of the Act in respect of the development of eligible infrastructural facilities. 41 ITA Nos.193-195/CTK/2019 19. Ld. AR also pointed out that the assessee was assigned full responsibility to do all acts for execution and completion of work right from the beginning till handing over of the project to the contractee. The contract

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

LALIT KUMAR JALAN,JALAN PHARMACEUTICALS vs. ITO WARD-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed with the directions

4) of section 23, sub- section (5) of section 24, section 34-AA, section 35 and section 37 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), shall, with the necessary modifications, apply in relation to such reference as they apply in relation to a reference made by the Assessing Officer under sub-section (1) of section

M/S. PRAKASH KUMAR ROUT,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

4. In our view, since the matter is covered by judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed". In the earlier case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) their lordship had observed as under:- "Notice

M/S. PRAKASH KUMAR ROUT,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

4. In our view, since the matter is covered by judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed". In the earlier case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) their lordship had observed as under:- "Notice

M/S. PRAMOD KUMAR ROUT,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

4. In our view, since the matter is covered by judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed". In the earlier case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) their lordship had observed as under:- "Notice

M/S. PASUPATI BREEDING FARM PVT. LTD.,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

4. In our view, since the matter is covered by judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed". In the earlier case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) their lordship had observed as under:- "Notice

M/S. PRAGATI MILK PRODUCT PVT. LTD.,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, all the appeals of the all the assessees are allowed

4. In our view, since the matter is covered by judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed". In the earlier case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) their lordship had observed as under:- "Notice

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

section 139(4) of the Act. Therefore, filing of Form 10 during reassessment proceeding is filing of the same within

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

section 139(4) of the Act. Therefore, filing of Form 10 during reassessment proceeding is filing of the same within

M/S. BIRAJA CONSTRUCTION,JAJPUR vs. ACIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

section 153A; 4 ITA Nos.200-203/CTK/2022 (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess

M/S. BIRAJA CONSTRUCTION,JAJPUR vs. ACIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

section 153A; 4 ITA Nos.200-203/CTK/2022 (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess

M/S. BIRAJA CONSTRUCTION,JAJPUR vs. ACIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

section 153A; 4 ITA Nos.200-203/CTK/2022 (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess

M/S. BIRAJA CONSTRUCTION,JAJPUR vs. ACIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

section 153A; 4 ITA Nos.200-203/CTK/2022 (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess

ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. INDIAN METALS & FERRO ALLOYS LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the

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

reassessment proceedings had been initiated by the AO on an erroneous assumption that all payments to non-resident are subject to withholding taxes under section 195 of the Act and. therefore, income had escapement assessment for failure to withhold tax u/s 195(1) r/w 40(a)(i), which is in complete disregard of the decision of Supreme Court

INDIAN METALS AND FERRO ALLOY LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the

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

reassessment proceedings had been initiated by the AO on an erroneous assumption that all payments to non-resident are subject to withholding taxes under section 195 of the Act and. therefore, income had escapement assessment for failure to withhold tax u/s 195(1) r/w 40(a)(i), which is in complete disregard of the decision of Supreme Court

RAJESH KUMAR MISHRA,ROURKELA vs. ITO WARD-1, ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiarajesh Kumar Mishra, I.T.O., Labour Tenament, Qr. No. Pwd/La- Ward-1, Vs. 111, Jail Road, Panpose, Rourkela. Rourkela-756004 (Odisha) Pan No. Amgpm 2651 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

4. In reply, the ld. Sr.DR submitted that the issues in this appeal should be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) as the issues are to be decided alongwith the issues which are pending before the ld. CIT(A) in respect of the reassessment order, in so far as Section

BASUKINATH BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,SUNDARGARH vs. PRINCIPAL CIT(CENTRAL), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment and which are in force on the date of initiation of the search or making of the requisition. The assessee was engaged in the operation of a container freight station. It claimed deduction under section 80-IA(4