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

u/s. 30\nof the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.\nThe Mining tribunal passed an order dt. 16.01.2012 in Revision order\nno. 25/2012 in the case of Smt. Indrani Patnaik (Revisionist) v/s\nGovernment of Odisha (Respondent). In the order the Mining Tribunal\ndismissed the findings of the State Government as baseless by\nobserving that there was no evidence

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

u/s. 30\nof the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.\nThe Mining tribunal passed an order dt. 16.01.2012 in Revision order\nno. 25/2012 in the case of Smt. Indrani Patnaik (Revisionist) v/s\nGovernment of Odisha (Respondent). In the order the Mining Tribunal\ndismissed the findings of the State Government as baseless by\nobserving that there was no evidence

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

23,734/- and computers of Rs. 1,34,580/- totalling to Rs. 3,94,494/- 11. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal(s) before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) to Rs. 1,83,420/- against Rs. 10,99,693/-. 12. Aggrieved

BIBHUDUTTA PANDA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ASST.CIT ,CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 of the Act". v.) The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Savesh Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India (35 taxmann.com 85) held in para-22 & 23 that the question which now called for consideration was whether on receipt of satisfaction note, even if the assessing authority receiving satisfaction note has already

BIBHUDUTTA PANDA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ASST.CIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.76 To 81/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2007-2008 To 2012-2013) Bibhudutta Panda, Vs Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Plot No.73 & 74, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-751013 Pan No. :Adapp 6398 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 of the Act". v.) The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Savesh Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India (35 taxmann.com 85) held in para-22 & 23 that the question which now called for consideration was whether on receipt of satisfaction note, even if the assessing authority receiving satisfaction note has already