M/S. SIDDHI VINAYAK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIGARH, RAIGARH vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAIGARH, RAIGARH

ITA 534/RPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 July 2026AY 2014-1515 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It held that the lower appellate authority should have considered the additional evidence produced by the assessee and obtained a remand report from the AO.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed 380 days late. The assessee is aggrieved by the rejection of its books of account and an addition of net income based on a 10% profit rate on turnover.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate authority erred in not considering additional evidence and obtaining a remand report before deciding the appeal. Whether the rejection of books of account and estimation of income were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 145(3),Section 250(4),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Appellant: Shri Yash Jain, CA
For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.07.2026Pronounced: 21.07.2026

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Gurugram dated 03.03.2025 for the assessment year 2014-15 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

At the very outset, it is noted that the appeal is time barred by 380 days. That explaining the said delay, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted condonation petition a/w. affidavit, da

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 145(3)

All 3,640 judgments and leading authorities on Section 145(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →