SHRI SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR AGRAWAL, KORBA,KORBA(CG) vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE KORBA, KORBA(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assesee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 93 & 94/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Prop. Of M/S. Shrikishan & Co., T.P Nagar, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Acgpa4350B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

TDS provisions by deducting the tax at source and by paying the same to the credit of the Government before the due date of filing of their returns under section 139

SHRI SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR AGRAWAL, KORBA,KORBA(CG) vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE KORBA, KORBA(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assesee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 93 & 94/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Prop. Of M/S. Shrikishan & Co., T.P Nagar, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Acgpa4350B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

TDS provisions by deducting the tax at source and by paying the same to the credit of the Government before the due date of filing of their returns under section 139

SHRI SHRI NISHANT JAIN,BILASPUR(CG) vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE-I, BILASPUR(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.199/Rpr/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Nishant Jain, Vs Jcit, Range-1, Bilaspur(Cg) M/S Landmark Engineer, Flat No.27, Shantinagar, Ring Road No.2, Bilaspur Pan No. : Agepj 9793 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

TDS defaults when amount is "payable". If amount is actually paid and tax is not deducted under the above sections, section 40(a)(ia) is not applicable. There is difference between the word 'paid' or 'payable', the legislature used the word very carefully in s. 40(a)(ia) and in all its wisdom at the time of incorporating the section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR vs. CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LTD., RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2 & 3/Rpr/2023 Co Nos. 19 & 20/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

139 of the Act. As the aforesaid position of law was dislodged only pursuant to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Servies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1 (supra)dated 12.10.2022, as per which the delayed deposit by an assessee of the employee's share of contribution towards labor welfare funds was liable

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR vs. CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LTD., RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2 & 3/Rpr/2023 Co Nos. 19 & 20/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

139 of the Act. As the aforesaid position of law was dislodged only pursuant to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Servies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1 (supra)dated 12.10.2022, as per which the delayed deposit by an assessee of the employee's share of contribution towards labor welfare funds was liable

SHREE SITA EDIBLES LIMITED,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 1(1), BHILAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 151/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shree Sita Edibles Ltd. Behind District Court, Millpara, Durg. (C.G.)-491 001 Pan : Aapcs4417H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

139'. This section 40(a)(ia) of the Act refers only to The duty to deduct tax and pay to government account. If there is any shortfall due to any difference of opinion as to the taxability of any item or the nature of payments falling under various TDS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , RAIPUR vs. GRAND MOTORS, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Grand Motors, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Lodhi Para Chowk, Pandri, Raipur Raipur, 492001, Chhattisgarh Chhattisgarh, 492001 Pan: Aagfg8524P

TDS thereon. The appellant has requested that disallowance may kindly be restricted to 30% of the amount. Section 40(a)(ia) reads as under:- "Section 40(a){ia} {ia) thirty per cent of any sum payable to a resident, on which tax is deductible at source under Chapter XV/1-B and such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction

M/S GOPAL RICE INDUSTRIES, ,DHAMTARI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 291/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Gopal Rice Industries Village- Sambalpur, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493 773 Pan : Aabfi4303F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

TDS was done on hire purchase interest paid to NBFC violating the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act, 1961. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I have reason to believe that the income of the assessee escaped assessment to the extent of Rs.8,54,977/- and therefore, notice u/s.148 of the Act is issued

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), , RAIPUR vs. SHRI RADHESHYAM AGRAWAL, RAIPUR

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.32/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. Radheshyam Agrawal 27/B, Ankit Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.). Pan : Aczpa6544J ……""यथ" / Respondent

139] in an account in any such bank or institution as may be specified in, and utilised in accordance with, any scheme which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, frame in this behalf and such return shall be accompanied by proof of such deposit ; and, for the purposes of sub-section (1), the amount

SHRI JAGANNATH TRANSPORT CORPORATION, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 162/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2023-24)

TDS is being claimed, the corresponding receipts are not offered in the respective income schedules, to arrive at the taxable total income. Hence, the return of income filed is regarded as defective, as provided in Explanation (a) under section 139

DY.C.I.T. 1 vs. SHRI SANDEEP SURENDRAN NAIR, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

TDS has been deducted by assessee, have been offered by the respective payees in their returns of income and has paid the taxes on such receipts. The aforesaid contention of the Revenue has not been controverted by Ld. AR. 22. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township

DY.C.I.T. 1, BHILAI(CG) vs. SHRI SANDEEP SURENDRAN NAIR, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

TDS has been deducted by assessee, have been offered by the respective payees in their returns of income and has paid the taxes on such receipts. The aforesaid contention of the Revenue has not been controverted by Ld. AR. 22. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL)-I, RAIPUR vs. MESERS CHHATTISGARH STEEL & POWER LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

TDS on wheeling charges is not sustainable, hence the disallowance u/s 40 (a)(ia) of the Act is deleted and this ground of appeal is allowed.” We find that the aforesaid view of the CIT(Appeals) is supported by the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Vs. Income Tax Officer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I, RAIPUR vs. MESERS CHHATTISGARH STEEL & POWER LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

TDS on wheeling charges is not sustainable, hence the disallowance u/s 40 (a)(ia) of the Act is deleted and this ground of appeal is allowed.” We find that the aforesaid view of the CIT(Appeals) is supported by the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Vs. Income Tax Officer

M/S. RAVI SHREE NARAYAN TRANSPORT,BHILAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), RAIPUR

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 105 To 107/Rpr/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2009-10 M/S Ravi Shree Narayan Transport Acc Main Gate, Jamul Square, Jamul, Bhilai.(C.G.)Pan : Ashfr7461F . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Tds, Raipur (C.G.) द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. R. Rao Revenue By : Shri G. N. Singh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 26/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am The Present Bunch Of Appeals Is Challenged Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Raipur [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Turned Out Of Consolidated Order Passed U/S 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Act, By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Tds), Raipur [For Short “Ao”], For Three Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2006-07 To 2008-09. Itat-Raipur Page 1 Of 14

TDS) on finance charges/interest payment to non-banking financial company/corporation [for short “NBFC”] is sufficient to hold the appellant as an ‘assessee in default’ within the realm of section 201(1) of the Act?’ Conversely ‘whether levy of penalty u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 221(1) of the Act is protected by the first proviso to section

M/S. RAVI SHREE NARAYAN TRANSPORT,BHILAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 105 To 107/Rpr/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2009-10 M/S Ravi Shree Narayan Transport Acc Main Gate, Jamul Square, Jamul, Bhilai.(C.G.)Pan : Ashfr7461F . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Tds, Raipur (C.G.) द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. R. Rao Revenue By : Shri G. N. Singh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 26/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am The Present Bunch Of Appeals Is Challenged Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Raipur [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Turned Out Of Consolidated Order Passed U/S 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Act, By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Tds), Raipur [For Short “Ao”], For Three Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2006-07 To 2008-09. Itat-Raipur Page 1 Of 14

TDS) on finance charges/interest payment to non-banking financial company/corporation [for short “NBFC”] is sufficient to hold the appellant as an ‘assessee in default’ within the realm of section 201(1) of the Act?’ Conversely ‘whether levy of penalty u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 221(1) of the Act is protected by the first proviso to section

M/S. RAVI SHREE NARAYAN TRANSPORT,BHILAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 105 To 107/Rpr/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2009-10 M/S Ravi Shree Narayan Transport Acc Main Gate, Jamul Square, Jamul, Bhilai.(C.G.)Pan : Ashfr7461F . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Tds, Raipur (C.G.) द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. R. Rao Revenue By : Shri G. N. Singh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 26/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am The Present Bunch Of Appeals Is Challenged Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Raipur [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Turned Out Of Consolidated Order Passed U/S 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Act, By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Tds), Raipur [For Short “Ao”], For Three Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2006-07 To 2008-09. Itat-Raipur Page 1 Of 14

TDS) on finance charges/interest payment to non-banking financial company/corporation [for short “NBFC”] is sufficient to hold the appellant as an ‘assessee in default’ within the realm of section 201(1) of the Act?’ Conversely ‘whether levy of penalty u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 221(1) of the Act is protected by the first proviso to section

M/S DIVYANSH INFRA ESTATE PVT LTD,RAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(1) RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.424/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Divyansh Infra Estate Private Limited House No.44/487, Arihant Niwas, Satti Bazar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aadcd7801J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025, after relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur (supra) had held that a justice oriented and liberal approach be adopted while considering the application filed by the assessee for condonation of delay. That in the recent judgment

DOLPHIN PROMOTERS AND BUILDERS,RAIPUR vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 58/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12)

139, after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 or sub-section (2) of section 115WE or sub-section (2) of section 143 or after the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier; (b) where he has made no such return, after the expiry