PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,BHUBANESWAR vs. SEKHAR KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

transferred amount to the firms owned by Sitaram Pathak and Inderlal Kejriwal, the money was credited to the account of Nand Lal HUF from M/s Rhea Enterprises which is controlled by Shyamal Chakravarty. As per statements of Rajesh Kumar Fogla under Section 164 Cr. P.C. and Vikas Khetan also, it transpires that the present appellant used to receive the bribe

M/S.SHEETAL REAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial questions of law

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

1) was issued. The assessee is in the business of manufacture and sale of plywood and related products having its registered office in Kolkata and four regional offices and seventeen branches. Several issues were discussed with the assessee and the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) by order dated 20th December, 2007. In this appeal we are concerned with

MAHESWAR PANDA vs. I.T.O., WARD-2(1)

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

9,72,000/- (v) Loss of love and affection = Rs.25,000/- (vi) Funeral and transportation expenses = Rs.25,000/- Total Compensation Awarded = (iv+v+vi) Rs.10,22,000/- Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of petitioners and against the respondents. VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2026.02.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S.UTKAL ALUMINA INTERNATIONAL LTD.

Bench: MR. JUSTICE K. S. JHAVERI (CJ),MR. JUSTICE K.R.MOHAPATRA

transfer by way of mortgage the urban land bearing No. A-I, Radhey Puri, Delhi-51. DW-2 22. Copy of Grant of mortgage permission in respect of plot no.8, Sector B &C for which loan has been sanctioned for construction of building thereon. DW-2 23. Copy of No objection certificate to mortgage the plot no.8, Sector

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.AHINSA VINIMAY PVT.LTD.

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in seeking exact comparability, which searching for comparable companies of the assessee under TNMM whereas the requirement of law and international jurisprudence require seeking similar comparable companies? 2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case