JAY KISHORE CHOUBEY,RAIRANGPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, ASANSOL

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2010-2011 2011 Jay Jay Kishore Kishore Choubey, Choubey, Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-1, Asansol. Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Acmpc 1759 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue By : Shri Charan Das, Sr. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11 11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/11 /11/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

8 | 15 Assessment Year : 2010-2011 Reassessment u/s 147: No addition can be made on other grounds when the reasons for which reassessment undertaken cease to survive IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on : 2nd MAY, 2011 Judgment delivered on : 3rd JUNE, 2011 RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX The Honorable Delhi High

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

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.

u/s. 147 of the Act. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Yogeshbhai R Dhanak V. Assistant Commissioner of Income tax (2014) 41 taxmann.com 183 on similar facts has held as under: “Section 147, read with section 158BC of the Income tax Act, 1961- income escaping assessment-Non disclosure of primary facts (Matter relating to b lock

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JHARSUGUDA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, JHARSUGUDA vs. HIRAKHAND TRANSPORT AND MULTI PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., BRAJARAJ NAGAR

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.282/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Vs Hirakhand Transport & Multi Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q & प्रत्याक्षेऩ सं/Cross Objection No.04/Ctk/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.282/Ctk/2024) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Hirakhand Transport & Multi Vs Ito, Ward-1, Jharsuguda Purpose Cooperative Society Pvt. Ltd., At-Chingriguda, Bijapara, R Kudopali, Brajrajnagar, Jharsuguda-768216 Pan No. :Aaaah 5874 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Agrawala, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04/09/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15.05.2024, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1064895008(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

8. For that vide Para 7 of the order u/s 148A(d) dated 29.07.20,2, the Ld A.O had dropped the case by mentioning being NOT A FIT CASEJO ISSUE NTICE U/S 148. The order u/s 147 dated 31.03.2022 becomes infructuous, the moment the Ld. AO decided to follow judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ashish Agrawal

M/S. L.A.DEVELOPERS,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2008-2009 2009 M/S. M/S. L.A.Developers, L.A.Developers, Hig Hig-47, Vs. Cit, 2Nd Floor, Floor, Jayadev Jayadev Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vihar, Bhubaneswar. Vihar, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. No.Aacfl 6157 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Ar , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 02 /6/ 20 / 2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02 / /6/2022 O R D E R

u/s 255(8) of the Act. Ld counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeal should not be adjourned to such a long date but the application could be disposed off in respect of whether the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear the appeal in view of the insertion of section 255(7,8 & 9). Consequently, the appeal was posted

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

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt

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

8 SCC 481 & Islamic Academy of Education V State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697, the assessee is not eligible f07' exemption either u/s.11 or 10(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Further, the Permanent Trustees as well as their daughters have also substantial interest so far as the advancement of loan to the Trust and receipt