M/S. DAZZLE BEVERAGES,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year : 2005-06

section 40(a)(ia) of the Act of Rs.7,40,779/- for the assessment year 2005-06. 3. Facts are that the Assessing Officer passed reassessment

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

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

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened

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

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

M/S. JAYA MANGALA CONSTRUCTION,KORAPUT vs. ITO, WARD-1, JEYPORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2005-06

section 40(b) of the act, which is clearly a change of opinion and in view of the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Speed Audio Pvt Ltd and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd (supra), reassessment

M/S. BAJRANGBALI STEEL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD,ROURKLA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.31 To 33/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017 To 2018-2019) M/S Bee Pee Rollers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3593 P & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.34 To 39/Ctk/2022 & आयकर अऩीऱ/Ita No.109/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2017 To 2020-2021) M/S Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Ltd., Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3594 L & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.40 To 44/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2018-2019) M/S Bajrangbali Re-Rollers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aaccb 6678 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Shri B.K. Tibrewal, Ca & Ms. Nisha Rachh, Ca Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr.Cit(Osd) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

ACIT, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD, SAMBALPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.396/Ctk/2013 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Acit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs. M/S Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcm 5188 P (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh, Citdr निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Poddar/N.Kedia, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, In Appeal No.0403/2012-13, Dated 23.05.2013, Passed U/S.147/143(3)/250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2008-2009, Wherein The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 1. Whether The Learned First Appellate Authority Was Justified In Relying On Writ Cases Ignoring The Fact That Specific Findings In Writ-Petitions Can Not Be Straightaway Applied To Other Cases. 2. Whether The Learned Appellate Authority Was Justified To Hold That There Is Change In Opinion Of The Assessing Officer Regarding Admissibility / Inadmissibility Of Expenditure While Proceeding U/S.147 Of The 1.T. Act,1961 As Compared To His Findings In The Original Assessment Order. 3. Whether The Ld. First Appellate Authority Was Justified To Delete The Disallowance Of Rs.696.10 Lakhs Made By The Assessing Officer Towards 'Prior Period Expenses', Totally Ignoring The Findings Of The Assessing Officer. 4. Whether The Learned First Appellate Authority Was Justified To Delete The Disallowance Of Rs.631.34 Lakhs Made By The Assessing Officer Towards `Unpaid Statutory Liability' Under Section 43B Of The I.T. Act,1961, Totally Ignoring The Findings Of The Assessing Officer.

40(a)(ia) and 40A(3). Their Lordships of the Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 02.3.2012 held : 'No doubt Section 147 of the Act is very wide and conferred power upon the Assessing Officer to re-assess the assessment made previously where there is escaped assessment and sufficient basis for re-assessment. However, Section 147 does not authorize

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ODISHA vs. ODISHA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED, ODISHA

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2020-2021 2021 Dcit, Aayakar Bhavan, Main Dcit, Aayakar Bhavan, Main Vs. Odisha Odisha State State Beverages Beverages 2Nd Building, Building, Rajaswas Rajaswas Vihar, Vihar, Corporation Corporation Limited., Limited., 2 Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar. Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar. Floor, Floor, Fortune Fortune Towers, Towers, S.E.Rly S.E.Rly Proj. Proj. Complex, Complex, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No. (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Satyajit Mishra, Ca Satyajit Mishra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 21.9.2023 Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S.270A Of 21.9.2023 Deleting The Penalty Levied U/S.270A Of The Act For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2020-2021. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 23.9.2 Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 23.9.2022 By Disallowing A Sum Of 022 By Disallowing A Sum Of Rs.3,00,00,000/ Rs.3,00,00,000/- Out Of Expenses Claimed By The Assessee On Account Of Out Of Expenses Claimed By The Assessee On Account Of License Fees U/S.40(A)(Iib) Of The Act. Simultaneously, Penalty Proceedings License Fees U/S.40(A)(Iib) Of The Act. Simultaneously, Penalty Proceedings License Fees U/S.40(A)(Iib) Of The Act. Simultaneously, Penalty Proceedings

40(a)(iib) has challenged the operation of the same , which finally settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kerala State Beverages Manufacturing and Marketing Corporation Ltd (supra). Therefore, it is not a case where the claim made by the assessee was not bonafide at all. Further, the AO has not mentioned as to under which

ITO, KHURDA vs. BULARAM DALAI, KHURDA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

40 Taxmann.com 25 / (2014) 220 Taxman 34 (Mag.) (MP)(HC), there was no new material to hold that income has escaped assessment, hence reassessment was held to be not valid. The facts are that the assessment had been framed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, the case was reopened on account that assessee has wrongly claimed depreciation which

M/S. JAYA MANGALA CONSTRUCTION,KORAPUT vs. ITO, WARD-1, JEYPORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2006-07

40% or 30% was a question of law. Therefore, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian And Eastern Newspaper Society(supra), the assessment order passed should be cancelled. 4. On the other hand, ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities. Asse ssment Year :20 06- 07 5. I have heard

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 13. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee filed written synopsis, which is as under: “It is pertinent to mention that the application for claim of exemption

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 13. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee filed written synopsis, which is as under: “It is pertinent to mention that the application for claim of exemption

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 13. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee filed written synopsis, which is as under: “It is pertinent to mention that the application for claim of exemption

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 13. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee filed written synopsis, which is as under: “It is pertinent to mention that the application for claim of exemption

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 13. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee filed written synopsis, which is as under: “It is pertinent to mention that the application for claim of exemption