PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE1(1), CUTTACK

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

46,025/- was utilised for pert infrastructure activities. Here, your kind attention is invited to the definition of infrastructure facility as stated in section 801A of the Act which reads as follows Explanation For the purposes of this clause, "infrastructure facility" means (a) a road including toll road, a bridge or a mil system: (b) a highway project including housing

ITO, ANGUL WARD, , ANGUL vs. M/S. NCC SMASL JRT(JV),, ANGUL

transfer the entire sale proceeds to AE to ensure lowest sale price to MC. The assessee failed to justify the rationality of the approach since, the ultimate sale price to MCL is not linked with the cost of either assessee or AE in the entire scheme of arrangement. Further, the assessee's contention that the income of the assessee

ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL vs. NCC-SMASL-JRT(JV), ANGUL

transfer the entire sale proceeds to AE to ensure lowest sale price to MC. The assessee failed to justify the rationality of the approach since, the ultimate sale price to MCL is not linked with the cost of either assessee or AE in the entire scheme of arrangement. Further, the assessee's contention that the income of the assessee

LORAMITRA RATH,KAIRAPARI KOTSAHI, TANGI vs. DCIT (CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2015-16 Loramitra Loramitra Rath, Rath, Kairapari Kairapari Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aebpr 6065 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr

46 IT'R 144 (SC). In the decision of CIT vs. Sitaldar Tirathdas 41 ITR 367, Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled that what is to be subject for taxation is only real income over which the assessee possesses a right and not any other thing. In Somaiya Organo Chemicals Ltd vs CIT 216 ITR 291, the issue considered

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

transferred to their constituents. Therefore, the joint venture or the consortium was only a paper entity and has not executed in contract itself. They have also not offered any income out of the work 16 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 executed by its constituents, nor did they claim any deductions

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

transferred to their constituents. Therefore, the joint venture or the consortium was only a paper entity and has not executed in contract itself. They have also not offered any income out of the work 16 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 executed by its constituents, nor did they claim any deductions

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

transferred to their constituents. Therefore, the joint venture or the consortium was only a paper entity and has not executed in contract itself. They have also not offered any income out of the work 16 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 executed by its constituents, nor did they claim any deductions

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

transferred to their constituents. Therefore, the joint venture or the consortium was only a paper entity and has not executed in contract itself. They have also not offered any income out of the work 16 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 executed by its constituents, nor did they claim any deductions

ASST. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAMBALPUR vs. SHREE BALAJI ENGICON LIMITED, BELPAHAR RS

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

transferred to their constituents. Therefore, the joint venture or the consortium was only a paper entity and has not executed in contract itself. They have also not offered any income out of the work 16 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 executed by its constituents, nor did they claim any deductions

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

transferred to their constituents. Therefore, the joint venture or the consortium was only a paper entity and has not executed in contract itself. They have also not offered any income out of the work 16 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 executed by its constituents, nor did they claim any deductions

M/S. SHREE BAALAJI ENGICONS LIMITED,JHARSUGUDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

transferred to their constituents. Therefore, the joint venture or the consortium was only a paper entity and has not executed in contract itself. They have also not offered any income out of the work 16 IT(SS)A No.77 & ITA Nos.320,296,88, 141,89,142,13/CTK/2023 &CO No.02/CTK/2023 executed by its constituents, nor did they claim any deductions

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

price and credited to the said fund were first liable to be used in adjusting the losses of the respondent society in the working year; thereafter in the repayment of initial loan from the Industrial Finance Corporation of India and then for redeeming the Government share and only in the event of any balance being left, it was liable

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. HOTEL SUKHAMAYA PVT. LTD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

price and credited to the said fund were first liable to be used in adjusting the losses of the respondent society in the working year; thereafter in the repayment of initial loan from the Industrial Finance Corporation of India and then for redeeming the Government share and only in the event of any balance being left, it was liable