{"id":34414,"date":"2023-04-23T19:53:34","date_gmt":"2023-04-23T14:23:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-v-nidan-2022-220-dtr-137-329-ctr-919-orissa-hc\/"},"modified":"2023-04-23T19:53:34","modified_gmt":"2023-04-23T14:23:34","slug":"pcit-v-nidan-2022-220-dtr-137-329-ctr-919-orissa-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-v-nidan-2022-220-dtr-137-329-ctr-919-orissa-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"PCIT v. Nidan ( 2022) 220 DTR 137\/ 329 CTR 919 ( Orissa )( HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The question before the High Court was<\/p>\n<p>(A)\u201c Whether the ITAT was correct in observing that the assessment order dated 30 th December 2016 under section 144 read with section 153A of the Income -tax Act 1961 received by the assessee on 9 th January 2017 could \u00a0be said to be barred by limitation , when there was no indication to show that the Assessing Officer did not pass the said order on 30 th December\u00a0 , 2016 ? \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>(B) Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that when there are two divergent views of different High Courts , one favouring the assessee should be followed , totally ignoring the fact that the decision of the High Court favouring the Revenue was confirmed by the Apex Court , in as much as the SLP filed in that regard was dismissed ?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal . \u00a0(AY. 2009 -10 to 2015 -16 )<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 153A: Assessment \u2013 Search or requisition- Limitation \u2013 Interpretation \u2013 Precedent &#8211; Divergent view of different High Courts -SLP dismissed in  limine \u2013 One favouring the assessee should be followed .   [ S. 132, 153B, ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-34414","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-8X4","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34414","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=34414"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34414\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":34415,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34414\/revisions\/34415"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34414"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34414"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34414"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}