“Section 105(1)”

RAIPUR REALTY PVT LTD, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 (1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.241/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Raipur Realty Pvt. Ltd. E-76, G.K. Chambers, Sector-2, Devendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aahcr0621C ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

list of enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule, the same would be precluded from the RFCTLARR Act as per the provisions of Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act and therefore the compensation received by the assessee from the NHAI would not be exempted from taxation under the provisions ... Fourth Schedule to the RFCTLARR Act are precluded from the operation of the RFCTLARR Act by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act and accordingly, the exemption prescribed under the provisions of Section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act would not apply, is squarely covered

GANGUNAIDU SABBAVARAPU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHPATNAM

score also. 7.22 A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the respondent has come to the conclusion that in view of Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act is not applicable to acquisition of land under the N.H.Act, which is excluded in the Fourth Schedule, since the land

ABC PAPER PRODUCTS,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(1) AGRA, AGRA

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

ITA No.146/Agr/2025 ABC Paper Products vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘SMC': AGRA BEFORE SHRI SUNIL

SANJAY KUMAR BAID,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sanjay Kumar Baid Arihant Bearing & Mill Stores, Opp. Deshbandhu School, Station Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Acipj2887L ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

present case, the assessee has claimed that the land has been acquired by the NHAI Act. According to section 105(1) of RFCTLARR Act, 2013, the provisions of this Act shall not apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule. The NHAI Act (The National ... Raipur in the case of Heritage Buildcon (P) Ltd. v. CIT, 2023 SCC OnLine ITAT 1285. has taken a clear view, holding that Section 105(1) makes all provisions of the Act inapplicable to the land acquisitions made under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule to the Act. While

MADANLAL LODHA,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No: Ita 32/Rpr/2022 (Assessment Years:2017-18) Madanlal Lodha, V Pr. Commissioner Of Income Ta, C/O M/S Prakash Trading Comp. S Raipur-(I) Shop No. 109 & 110, Textile Market, Pandri, Raipur, (C.G.) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : Shri R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By : Shri S.K. Meena, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03-08-2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20-10-2023

also submitted that the OM referred to deals with acquisitions other than the acquisitions under RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and in context of Section 105(1) and (3) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 which deals with Fourth schedule enactments, whereas the acquisition in the case of assessee was under the RFCTLARR

M/S FOOD HEALTH PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

A.Y.2017-18 Apart from that, the Pr. CIT relied on the OM dated 06th June 2019 of 6. CBDT, New Delhi, wherein as per Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013, application of any of the sections of the said Act was excluded explicitly concerning enactments mentioned in the “Fourth ... Schedule.” He further observed that the only exception to Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013 was carved out in Section 105(3) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013, as per which only First, Second and Third schedules applied to the “Fourth Schedule” Acts. Based on his observations above

M/S RAIPUR REALITY PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

A.Y.2017-18 Apart from that, the Pr. CIT relied on the OM dated 06th June 2019 of 6. CBDT, New Delhi, wherein as per Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013, application of any of the sections of the said Act was excluded explicitly concerning enactments mentioned in the “Fourth ... Schedule.” He further observed that the only exception to Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013 was carved out in Section 105(3) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013, as per which only First, Second and Third schedules applied to the “Fourth Schedule” Acts. Based on his observations above

M/S HERITAGE BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1,, RAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

A.Y.2017-18 Apart from that, the Pr. CIT relied on the OM dated 06th June 2019 of 6. CBDT, New Delhi, wherein as per Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013, application of any of the sections of the said Act was excluded explicitly concerning enactments mentioned in the “Fourth ... Schedule.” He further observed that the only exception to Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013 was carved out in Section 105(3) of the RFCTLARR Act 2013, as per which only First, Second and Third schedules applied to the “Fourth Schedule” Acts. Based on his observations above