BIKASH DEB,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.357 & 388/Ctk/2019 /2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010 10 & 2010-11 Bikash Dev Bikash Dev, Flat No.101, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Haraprity Haraprity Apar Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vivekananda Vivekananda Marg, Marg, Old Old Town, Bhubaneswar. Town, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ahepd 0737 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

section 149 in fact require a quantification to be in excess of amount of Rs.1 lakh. It was the submission that even this has not been mentioned by the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that though the Assessing Officer mentions a show cause notice in respect of penalty of Rs.243.48 crores issued by the State Government, the assessee

BIKASH DEB,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE- 2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.357 & 388/Ctk/2019 /2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010 10 & 2010-11 Bikash Dev Bikash Dev, Flat No.101, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Haraprity Haraprity Apar Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vivekananda Vivekananda Marg, Marg, Old Old Town, Bhubaneswar. Town, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ahepd 0737 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

section 149 in fact require a quantification to be in excess of amount of Rs.1 lakh. It was the submission that even this has not been mentioned by the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that though the Assessing Officer mentions a show cause notice in respect of penalty of Rs.243.48 crores issued by the State Government, the assessee

MIRNAL MEHTA,CUTTACK vs. ITO WRD-2(4), , CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Section ( borrowed information by AO ) that heavy cash is deposited in the State Bank of India having account No. 30926528935. The said bank was duly verified by the Id. AO during the original assessment proceedings. No new material was received by the AO nor has any reference to any new materials on record but only on a revisiting

KOTHAKOTA RAMA RAO,RAYAGADA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)सं./Ita No.132/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Kothakota Rama Rao, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Kothapeta, Rayagada, Bhubaneswar District-Rayagada Pan No. : Aeppk 1600 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.19&20/Ctk/2019 & Ita No.386/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Kothakota Rama Rao, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Kothapeta, Rayagada, Bhubaneswar District-Rayagada Pan No. : Aeppk 1600 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 11.09.2018 & 29.08.2018 For Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017. 2. Since, Similar Issues Have Been Raised In All The Appeals, Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Shall Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y.2013-2014 In It(Ss)A No.132/Ctk/2018 After Taking Into Consideration The Grounds & Facts Mentioned

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

KOTHAKOTA RAMA RAO,RAYAGADA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)सं./Ita No.132/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Kothakota Rama Rao, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Kothapeta, Rayagada, Bhubaneswar District-Rayagada Pan No. : Aeppk 1600 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.19&20/Ctk/2019 & Ita No.386/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Kothakota Rama Rao, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Kothapeta, Rayagada, Bhubaneswar District-Rayagada Pan No. : Aeppk 1600 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 11.09.2018 & 29.08.2018 For Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017. 2. Since, Similar Issues Have Been Raised In All The Appeals, Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Shall Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y.2013-2014 In It(Ss)A No.132/Ctk/2018 After Taking Into Consideration The Grounds & Facts Mentioned

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

KOTHAKOTA RAMA RAO,RAYAGADA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)सं./Ita No.132/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Kothakota Rama Rao, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Kothapeta, Rayagada, Bhubaneswar District-Rayagada Pan No. : Aeppk 1600 P & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.19&20/Ctk/2019 & Ita No.386/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Kothakota Rama Rao, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Kothapeta, Rayagada, Bhubaneswar District-Rayagada Pan No. : Aeppk 1600 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 11.09.2018 & 29.08.2018 For Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017. 2. Since, Similar Issues Have Been Raised In All The Appeals, Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Shall Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y.2013-2014 In It(Ss)A No.132/Ctk/2018 After Taking Into Consideration The Grounds & Facts Mentioned

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person [for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

CHOUDHURY SWAPAN KUMAR MOHAPATRA,BALASORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

73. It was the submission that there is no recording of satisfaction in the files of M/s SM Consultancy from whose possession these documents were seized for the purpose of transferring the alleged seized documents to the AO having jurisdiction over the assesee. It was the submission that even though the AO in respect of M/s SM Consultancy

RUKMANI INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.358/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Rukmani Infra Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Plot No.251, District Centre, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar-16 Pan No. : Aaecr 1585 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None : Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam, Cit-Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Has Been Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 16.06.2017, For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Extracted From The Available Records Are That, The Assessee, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956, Engaged In The Business Of Erection, Commissioning, Technical & Maintenance Service To Different Power Plants. The Return Of Income For The Ay 2013-14 Was Filed By The Assessee On 01.10.2013 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,65,91,030/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) & 143(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. Assessment Proceedings Were Completed By The Ao & Concluded With An Addition Of Rs.3,58,95,574/- Under Four Different

73,811 3 15/08/2012 13/12/2012 12,03,709 4 15/09/2012 30/09/2013 12,30,904 5 15/10/2012 30/09/2013 11,34,696 6 15/11/2012 23/09/2013 13,62,799 7 15/12/2012 23/09/2013 12,10,295 8 15/01/2013 23/09/2013 11,56,620 9 15/02/2013 23/09/2013 10,00,118 10 15/03/2013 23/09/2013 9,06,116 11 15/04/2013 30/09/2013

OMM DHANA LAXMI JEWELLERS,ANGUL vs. PCIT, INCOME TAX

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Omm Dhanalaxmi Vs. Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar-1. Jewellers, Bazar Chowk, Main Road, Angul-759122 Pan/Gir No.Aagfd 8791 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/9/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/9/2024 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld Pr.Cit, Bhubaneswar-1 U/S.263 Of The Act Dated 30.3.2024 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1) That The Ld. Pr Cit Bhubaneswar Has Erred In Law By Utilizing Section 263 For Directing The Assessing Officer To Do Necessary Verification As Per The Order Of Hon'Ble Itat Cuttack Bench Vide Order Dated 01-10-2019 Which Was Already Barred By Limitation. Provisions Of 263 Does Not Allow To Proceed For A Matter Which Was Already Barred By Limitation. Hence, The Order Passed Us 263 Needs To Be Quashed In To.

section 147 for the reason for failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. The total quantum income escaped is prima facie calculated at Rs.20,00,000/-“ 4. After that the reassessment order was passed on 29.09.2021 by making addition

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. KALINGA INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.266, 162&217/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-07&2005-06) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.108&294/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05&2006-07) Acit, Circle-2(2), Vs. Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Bhubaneswar, Odisha Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.27&42/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-05 & 2006-07) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh,Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: & Co No.42&27/Ctk/2014 These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue

section 147 of the Act. h. That, during the pendency of assessment proceedings the Ld. Assessing Officer is not permitted to reopen the case u/s 147 and issue notice u/s 148, therefore the reassessment proceedings are illegal and void ab-initio. 2. That, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has committed an error law in endorsing the action

ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. KALINGA INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY (KIIT), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.266, 162&217/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-07&2005-06) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.108&294/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05&2006-07) Acit, Circle-2(2), Vs. Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Bhubaneswar, Odisha Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.27&42/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-05 & 2006-07) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh,Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: & Co No.42&27/Ctk/2014 These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue

section 147 of the Act. h. That, during the pendency of assessment proceedings the Ld. Assessing Officer is not permitted to reopen the case u/s 147 and issue notice u/s 148, therefore the reassessment proceedings are illegal and void ab-initio. 2. That, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has committed an error law in endorsing the action

ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. KALINGA INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOSY, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.266, 162&217/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-07&2005-06) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.108&294/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05&2006-07) Acit, Circle-2(2), Vs. Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Bhubaneswar, Odisha Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.27&42/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-05 & 2006-07) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh,Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: & Co No.42&27/Ctk/2014 These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue

section 147 of the Act. h. That, during the pendency of assessment proceedings the Ld. Assessing Officer is not permitted to reopen the case u/s 147 and issue notice u/s 148, therefore the reassessment proceedings are illegal and void ab-initio. 2. That, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has committed an error law in endorsing the action

KALINGA INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY(KIIT),BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE2(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.266, 162&217/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2006-07&2005-06) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.108&294/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05&2006-07) Acit, Circle-2(2), Vs. Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Bhubaneswar, Odisha Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.27&42/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2004-05 & 2006-07) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2), Technology (Kiit), Plot No.383, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 384, Kiit Campus-1, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024, Odisha "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatk 3103 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh,Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: & Co No.42&27/Ctk/2014 These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue

section 147 of the Act. h. That, during the pendency of assessment proceedings the Ld. Assessing Officer is not permitted to reopen the case u/s 147 and issue notice u/s 148, therefore the reassessment proceedings are illegal and void ab-initio. 2. That, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has committed an error law in endorsing the action

DCIT, ROURKELA vs. SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR AHLUWALIA, SUNDERGARH

In the result, appeal of the department is allowed and that of the

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-2012

73 (Mad) and submitted that the appeal to ld CIT(A) lies only when the assessee aggrieved by the assessment or reassessment order and when the assessee, during the P a g e 5 | 20 ITA No.6 3/CTK /2 015 ITA No.0 1/CTK /2 015 Assessm ent Y ear : 20 11- 201 2 assessment proceedings, has voluntarily agreed to accept

M/S. EKALAVYA CAREER ACADEMY TRUST,SUNDERGARH vs. ITO, WARD-2, ROURKELA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiam/S Ekalavya Career Academy Trust, Unitech House, Udit Nagar, Rourkela-769012 Sundargarh, Odisha Pan No.Aaate 3283 F ………………Assessee Versus Ito, Ward-2, Rourkela ………………..Revenue Shri Sidharth Ray/Binod Agarwal, Ars For The Assessee Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr For The Revenue Date Of Hearing : 31/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Cuttack, In I.T.Appeal No.121/2012-13, Dated 29.02.2016 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Assessee Has Raised A Legal Ground Which Reads As Under :- “A) For That The Transfer Of The Case For The Period 2010-11 By The Jcit To The File Of The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Rourkela Vide Memo No.Ito/W-2/Rkl/Scrutiny/A.Y 2010-11 Dt.11Th October 2012, Is Without Jurisdiction As The Jcit Has No Power U/S 127 Of The It Act, Who Transferred The Case, Therefore The Order Of Assessment As Well As The Order Of Cit(A) Are Void Ab Initio & The Demand Raised In The Assessment Order Is Liable To Be Annulled.” 3. As The Above Ground Is Legal In Nature, Which Goes To The Root Of The Matter, Therefore, The Said Ground Was Heard First.

73 taxmann.com 69). The findings of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in para-10, 11, 12 & 13 are reproduced as under: "10. We have not been impressed by the submissions advanced by Mr. Dutt. 11. The objection raised by the appellants was in es sence an objection to the territorial jurisdiction of the assessing officer who had issued

AMBIKA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,BARIPADA vs. DCIT, BALASORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.191/Ctk/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011 - 2012) Ambika Construction Company, Vs. Dcit, Balasore Circle, C/O Mangal Kumar Bhaumik, Balasore Ward No.11, Station Bazar, Baripada-757001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaffa 2848 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.M.Pattnaik, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/03/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 27.02.2015 For The Assessment Year 2011-2012. 2. On Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Find That Initially The Appeal Of The Assessee Was Disposed Off By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 29.05.2017. Thereafter The Assessee Carried The Matter To The Hon’Ble Jurisdictional High Court & The Hon’Ble High Court Quashed The Order Of The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 24.04.2019 & Remitted The Matter Back For Consideration Of The Case Of The Assessee In The Light Of The Decision As Has Been Held By The Hon’Ble High Court In Income Tax (Appeal) No.36 Of 2015, Vide Order Dated 20.08.2018 In The Case Of 2 Mohd. Asif Habibi Vs. Pr. Cit & Others. Thereafter As Per The Direction

reassessment proceeding should be completed within a period of four months from today. The writ application is accordingly disposed of.” Taking into consideration the above, it appears that the learned Tribunal has not considered the matter in its proper perspective. Only on that ground, the order of the learned Tribunal is quashed and the matter is remitted back

SRI NARAYAN KUMAR KHAITAN, PROP: M/S. SRI GANESH METALIKS,SUNDARGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

73 taxmann.com 325 (SC) to support the proposition that when the assessee has not joined the postal department to question why the remark “LEFT” was made , the AO was entitled to proceed on the basis of remark of postal department and only on the ground of non-service of notice, the reassessment proceedings could not be terminated

SRI NARAYAN KUMAR KHAITAN, PROP: M/S. SRI GANESH METALIKS,SUNDARGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

73 taxmann.com 325 (SC) to support the proposition that when the assessee has not joined the postal department to question why the remark “LEFT” was made , the AO was entitled to proceed on the basis of remark of postal department and only on the ground of non-service of notice, the reassessment proceedings could not be terminated