In View Of The Order Passed By This Court Involving The Same Assessee For Assessment Year 2006-07 In Ita v. S.k. Jena/Secy

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK I.T.A. No. 132 of 2012 …. National Aluminium Co. Ltd. ….AppellantMr. A.U. Senapati, Advocate-versus- Commissioner of Income Tax, ….RespondentsBhubaneswar and AnotherMr. T.K. Satapathy, Senior Standing Counsel CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN ORDEROrder No.13.02.2023 05. 1. Admit. 2. The following question of law is framed for consideration by this Court: Court: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was legally justified in dismissing the grounds of the Appellant and upholding and affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) of the addition/disallowance of Rs.14,01,00,000/- under Section 43B of the Act in respect of Electricity Duty deposited into designated bank account as per direction of this Hon’ble Court.” the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was legally justified in dismissing the grounds of the Appellant and upholding and affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) of the addition/disallowance of Rs.14,01,00,000/- under Section 43B of the Act in respect of Electricity Duty deposited into designated bank account as per direction of this Hon’ble Court.” 3. In view of the order passed by this Court involving the same Assessee for assessment year 2006-07 in ITA No.133 of 2012(National Aluminium Company Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar) answering the identical question in the negative i.e. in favour of Appellant and against the Department, in the present appeal as well the above question is answered likewise i.e. in favour of the Assessee for assessment year 2006-07 in ITA No.133 of 2012(National Aluminium Company Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar) answering the identical question in the negative i.e. in favour of Appellant and against the Department, in the present appeal as well the above question is answered likewise i.e. in favour of the S.K. Jena/Secy. Assessee-Appellant and against the Department. The impugned order of the ITAT and the corresponding orders of the CIT(A) and the AO are set aside. 4. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules. of this order be issued as per rules. (Dr. S. Muralidhar) Judge Chief Justice (M.S.Raman)