Case LawHigh Court › Mr. T.k. Satpathy, Sr. Standing Counsel...

Mr. T.k. Satpathy, Sr. Standing Counsel v. M/S. Subham Estcon Private Ltd., …. Bhubaneswar

High Court 17 Feb 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
Mr. T.k. Satpathy, Sr. Standing Counsel v. M/S. Subham Estcon Private Ltd., …. Bhubaneswar
Date of order
17 Feb 2022
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mr. T.k. Satpathy, Sr. Standing Counsel v. M/S. Subham Estcon Private Ltd., …. Bhubaneswar, the High Court (2022) dismissed the appeal.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Order No. 02. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK I.T.A. No.94 of 2012 Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar …. Appellant Mr. T.K. Satpathy, Sr. Standing Counsel -versus- M/s. Subham Estcon Private Ltd., …. Bhubaneswar Respondent CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK ORDER17.02.2022 1. The present appeal by the Revenue is directed against an order dated 11[th] May, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (ITAT) in IT(SS)A No.122/CTK/2011 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 2. The question sought to be urged before the Court concerns the deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of unexplained cash found during search.? 3. The discussion in this regard is contended is paragraph-21 of the impugned order of the ITAT where it is noted that the AO has proceeded on an arithmetical mistake on calculation to Page 1 of 2 KC Bisoi // 2 // the extent of Rs.8.21 crores which had to be deleted by the CIT(A). 4. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. (Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan