Ita/34/2018 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Paradip Port Trust
High Court
05 Jan 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
Ita/34/2018 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Paradip Port Trust
Date of order
05 Jan 2023
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/34/2018 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Paradip Port Trust, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
Order No.
05.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ITA No.34 of 2018
…. Principal Commissioner of Income Appellant Tax, Cuttack
Mr. R. Chimanka, Sr. Standing Counsel along with A. Kedia, Jr. Standing Counsel -versus-
…. Respondent
Paradeep Port Trust
Mr. R.V. Easwar, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Rubal Bansal, Advocate; Ms. Ananya Rath, Advocate and Mr. Ashutosh Mohanty, Advocate
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN
ORDER
05.01.2023
1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against an order dated 24[th]October 2017 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing the Revenue’s appeal i.e., ITA No.121/CTK/2013 for the assessment year 2010-11.
2. Three questions are sought to be urged by the Revenue for consideration by this Court. The first question regarding the deletion of an addition on account of unpaid amount of provisions of the Pension Fund has been answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue by a separate order passed by this Court today in ITA No.90 of 2017 filed by the Revenue.
S.K. Guin
3. The second question regarding the deletion of an addition made under the head “Interest Accrued on Investment” also stands answered by the order passed by this Court against the Revenue in ITA No.90 of 2017.
4. The third question regarding depreciation on railways and rolling stock already stands answered against the Revenue by the order passed by this Court today in ITA Nos.64 and 65 of 2012.
5. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman)
Judge
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.