Mr. T.k. Satapathy, Sr. Standing Counsel v. Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd., Bhubaneswar
High Court
07 Feb 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
Mr. T.k. Satapathy, Sr. Standing Counsel v. Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd., Bhubaneswar
Date of order
07 Feb 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mr. T.k. Satapathy, Sr. Standing Counsel v. Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd., Bhubaneswar, the High Court (2024) dismissed the appeal.
Decision: Thus, the Appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
Digitally SignedSigned by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKARDesignation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior SecretaryReason: AuthenticationLocation: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACKDate: 23-Apr-2024 17:11:20
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ITA No.145 of 2018
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bhubaneswar
….
Appellant (s)
Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Sr. Standing Counsel
-versus-
Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd., Bhubaneswar
….
Respondent (s)
Mr. S. Jolly, Adv.
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI MR JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER
07.02.2024
Order No. 12.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Learned counsel for the parties are present. Judgment prepared in separate sheets is delivered and pronounced in open Court in the presence of learned counsel for the parties and the order is passed accordingly as follows:-
3. In the present case, the assessing officer has not relied on any new material which has come to light after the initial assessment on 31.12.2011. Even as regards the issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), the Assessing Officer did not form a decision on the basis of any fresh or new material. Rather, the same material
Digitally SignedSigned by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKARDesignation: Assistant Registrar-cum-Senior SecretaryReason: AuthenticationLocation: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACKDate: 23-Apr-2024 17:11:20
has been relied on to initiate reassessment. Moreover, no suppression of information has been proved. In light of this, there is no need to interfere with the finding of the tribunal. Thus, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as to cost.
(Dr.S.K.Panigrahi)
Judge
(G.Satapathy)
Judge
B. Jhankar
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.