IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Smt Rajalaxmi Ray, W/O Bibhuti Bhusan Ray, C/O. Shanti Memorial Hospital Complex, Udit Nagar, Rourkela PAN/GIR No (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ord CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 2/10394/2017 2. Shri P.C.Sethi Kumar, ld CIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(ss)A No.76/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Smt Rajalaxmi Ray, W/O Bibhuti Bhusan Ray, C/O. Shanti Memorial Hospital Complex, Udit Nagar, Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur PAN/GIR No.ADIPR 0791 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri P.C.Sethi, Adv Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT Date of Hearing : 29/0 Date of Pronouncement : 29/0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ord 2, Bhubaneswar dated 21.8.2023 in Appeal No.Bhubaneswar 2/10394/2017-18 for the assessment year 2011-12. P.C.Sethi, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Kumar, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue. Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 23 2012 Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur Respondent) , Adv : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR 04/2024 /04/2024 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld 21.8.2023 in Appeal No.Bhubaneswar- d AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Sanjay IT(ss)A No.76/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Page2 | 3 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessment in the present case is a protective assessment. It was the submission that this is an assessment u/s.153C of the Act. It was the submission that the satisfaction is compulsorily to be recorded in the assessment u/s.153C of the Act. It was the submission that the fact that it is a protective assessment, which clearly shows that there could not be substantive satisfaction in the case of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessment u/s.153C of the Act is liable to be annulled. 4. In reply, ld CIT DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A). 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the assessment in the case of the assessee passed u/s.153C of the Act in respect of addition of Rs.48,88,197/- being the amount invested in time deposits/ shares has been made on protective manner so also the amount of Rs.3,84,313/-. As it has been clearly mentioned that the addition has been made on protective manner, there could not be satisfaction recorded in the case of the assessee before invoking the provisions of section 153C of the Act. In these circumstances, respectfully following the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society, 397 ITR 344 (SC), the assessment passed in the case of the assessee u/s.153C r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 16.12.2016 stands quashed. IT(ss)A No.76/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Page3 | 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 29/04/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 29/04/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Smt Rajalaxmi Ray, W/O Bibhuti Bhusan Ray, C/O. Shanti Memorial Hospital Complex, Udit Nagar, Rourkela 2. The Respondent: Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur 3. The CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-2, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy//