Ita/96/2013 Of Comnr.of Income Tax v. M/S.patnaik Minerals
High Court
21 Feb 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
Ita/96/2013 Of Comnr.of Income Tax v. M/S.patnaik Minerals
Date of order
21 Feb 2022
Assessment year(s)
2009-10
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Ita/96/2013 Of Comnr.of Income Tax v. M/S.patnaik Minerals, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
Order No.
4.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ITA No.96 of 2013
….Appellant
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar
Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, Sr. S.C, Income Tax -versus-
….RespondentMr. A. Mohanty, Advocate
M/s. Patnaik Minreals Pvt. Ltd
CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE R. K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
21.02.2022
1. The Department is an appeal against the order dated 22[nd]February, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal in ITA No.31/CTK/2013 for the AY 2009-10.
2. The question sought to be urged in the present appeal concerns allowing the claim of the Assessee as expenses under the head ‘over burden cutting and removal charges’.
3. A contention of the Department is that, such expenses fell within the scope of Section 35-E of the Act. Having perused the impugned order of the ITAT and having heard learned counsel for the Department, the Court is of the view that issues was decided by the ITAT on facts and by concurring with the CIT(A).
T.TUDU
Consequently, the Court finds no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(R. K. Pattanaik)
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.