Case Law β€Ί High Court β€Ί Regulated Market Committee, Attabira, Ba...

Regulated Market Committee, Attabira, Baragarh v. Order24.06.2024

High Court 24 Jun 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· cisnc
Parties
Regulated Market Committee, Attabira, Baragarh v. Order24.06.2024
Date of order
24 Jun 2024
Assessment year(s)
2018-19
Outcome
Allowed

The order β€” as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Regulated Market Committee, Attabira, Baragarh v. Order24.06.2024, the High Court (2024) allowed the appeal.

Summary auto-generated from the order below β€” read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ITA No.20 of 2024 Principal Commissioner of income Tax, Sambalpur ….. Appellant Mr. S.C. Mohanty, Standing Counsel along with Mr. A. Kedia, Jr. Standing Counsel Regulated Market Committee, Attabira, Baragarh Vs. ….. Respondent CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER24.06.2024 Order No. 1 This matter is taken up by hybrid mode. 2.Heard Mr. S.C. Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel along with Mr. A. Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant. Mr. A. Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant. 3. The appellant has filed this appeal seeking to set aside the order dated 28.11.2023 passed in ITA No.285/CTK/2023 for the assessment year 2018-19, by which the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack dismissed the said ITA upholding the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10227690. order dated 28.11.2023 passed in ITA No.285/CTK/2023 for the assessment year 2018-19, by which the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack dismissed the said ITA upholding the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10227690. 4. Since the assessee has not filed the return of income for the financial year 2017-18 with regard to assessment year 2018-19, this Court disposes of this ITA at the stage of fresh admission. As per the information available, during the financial year 2017-18, the assessee had made Fresh Time Deposit of Rs.15,66,41,601/- with Allahabad financial year 2017-18 with regard to assessment year 2018-19, this Court disposes of this ITA at the stage of fresh admission. As per the information available, during the financial year 2017-18, the assessee had made Fresh Time Deposit of Rs.15,66,41,601/- with Allahabad Bank, Bargarh Branch, Bargarh and had received interest amounting to Rs.4,71,814 from the State Bank of India. The case of the assessee was taken up for reassessment by passing an order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 30.03.2022. The assessee did not file its return of income even in response to the said notice. Despite being provided with adequate opportunities of being heard, the assessee did not furnish any submission/response during the assessment proceedings. Considering the facts of the case, the Assessing Authority passed assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144 and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act on 01.03.2023 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.15,71,13,415/- after making addition of Rs.15,66,41,601/- under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rs.4,71,814/- under Section 69A of the Act. 5. Against the assessment order, the assessee preferred Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10227690 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, who, considering the statement made by the assessee that the source of the fixed deposits made in Allahabad bank is the market fees received from Orissa State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Bargarh and examining the documents filed by the assessee in support of the payment advice and the bank statements, vide order dated 28.07.2023, allowed the appeal with observation that the assessee is an agricultural produce market committee constituted under Orissa Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1956 for the purpose of regulating the marketing of agricultural produce and the income of the assessee is exempted under Section 10(26AAB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was also observed that the Assessing Officer could not apply these provisions because he did not receive any response to his notices from the assessee. provisions because he did not receive any response to his notices from the assessee. 6. Challenging the order dated 28.07.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, the appellant approached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack by filing ITA No.285/CTK/2023. The Tribunal, vide order dated 28.11.2023, while dismissing the said ITA and upholding the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10227690, stated that the assessee is an agricultural produce market committee constituted under Orissa Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1956 for the purpose of regulating the marketing of agricultural produce and in view of the same, the income of the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 10(26AAB) of the Act and the said finding of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has not been dislodged by the Department. Further, admittedly the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has taken into consideration the fact that the assessee was facing technical glitches in responding to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer along with supporting documents to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer on 24.11.2023 and the same finding has not been dislodged by the Department. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). 7. There is no material placed before this Court for consideration that the income derives from the purchase and sale of agricultural produce under the provisions of the Orissa Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1956 is liable for taxation. Therefore, this Court does not find any illegality or irregularity in the order dated 28.07.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which has been confirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, vide order dated 28.11.2023 passed in ITA No.285/CTK/2023. 8. Accordingly, this ITA merits no consideration and the same is dismissed. (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (G. SATAPATHY) JUDGE Alok Signature Not Verified Digitally SignedSigned by: ALOK RANJAN SETHYDesignation: A.R-cum-Sr. SecretaryReason: AuthenticationLocation: ORISSA HIGH COURTDate: 27-Jun-2024 10:23:00
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
βœ… Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice β†’ πŸ’¬ 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 β€” 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 Β· Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
Β© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP Β· LLPIN ACN-4920 Β· Jaipur, Rajasthan