BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

35 results for “TDS”+ Section 246Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi178Indore134Mumbai123Chennai114Pune87Raipur35Bangalore33Cochin26Dehradun26Jabalpur23Kolkata19Nagpur14Chandigarh13Surat11Panaji10Visakhapatnam9Amritsar8Jodhpur7Lucknow7Hyderabad7Jaipur7Karnataka4Ahmedabad4Cuttack3Allahabad2Agra1

Key Topics

TDS35Addition to Income34Section 25023Limitation/Time-bar20Condonation of Delay17Section 251(1)(a)14Section 250(6)13Section 249(3)12Section 234E12Penalty

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee company is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 43/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 43/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Seepat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495006 Pan: Aadcs2066E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Ajit Korde, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.K Meena, CIT-DR
Section 270ASection 3

section 3 M/s. South Eastern Coalfields LimitedVs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur 246A(1)(q) of the Act, thereby making the proceedings liable to be quashed. 3 That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in issuing show cause notice require appearance on a public holiday which renders the penalty

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 57
Section 250(4)5

JANTA INDUSTRIES,BASPAIPARA vs. MS.RANJINI SRIKUMAR, INCOMETAX OFFICER(TDS), INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 46/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.46 & 47/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Janta Industries Durga Talkies Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aaffj9101J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

246A(a), and, therefore, the CIT(A) ought to have examined legality of the adjustment made under this intimation in the light of the scope of the section 200A. Learned CIT(A) has not done so. He has justified the levy of fees on the basis of the provisions of Section 234E. That is not the issue here. The issue

JANTA INDUSTRIES,BASPAIPARA vs. MS.RANJINI SRIKUMAR, INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 47/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.46 & 47/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Janta Industries Durga Talkies Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aaffj9101J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (written submission)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

246A(a), and, therefore, the CIT(A) ought to have examined legality of the adjustment made under this intimation in the light of the scope of the section 200A. Learned CIT(A) has not done so. He has justified the levy of fees on the basis of the provisions of Section 234E. That is not the issue here. The issue

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

ITA 544/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT- DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 40Section 43B

section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the decision of Ld. Addl/JCIT (A)-1, Surat was justified in deleting the addition made by the OCIT CPC to the tune of Rs.3,05,92,653/- by holding that unpaid VAT could have been disallowed

RAJESH KUMAR SINGHANIA HUF,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 848/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.848/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar Singhania Huf B-22/12, Sector-3, Udaya Society, Tatibandh, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aadhr1548F

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 and (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025, we condone the delay of 30 days involved in the present appeal and the matter is heard on merits. 4. That the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had dismissed

M/S GULZAR-MOKSH(JV), JAGDALPUR,BASTAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAGDALPUR, BASTAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 166/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.166/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Gulzar-Moksh (Jv) Gulzar Niwas, Geedam Road, Jagdalpur (C.G)-494 001 Pan: Aanfg4916A ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Jagdalpur (C.G) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250(4)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 5

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. 4. That in the recent

ASIF ALI,NAWAGARH AMBIKAPUR vs. ITO WARD 1 AMBIKAPUR, KHARASIYA ROAD AMBIKAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 159/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.159/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Asif Ali Nawagarh Ambikapur, Surguja (C.G)-497 001 Pan: Aoypa3486J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Richa Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

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. 3. That in the recent

LATE SHANTI MOHTA,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 71/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.71/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Late Shanti Mohta 15/391, Jawahar Nagar, Ravigram S.O Chhattisgarh- 492 001 Pan: Aldpm6184F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 5

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

MANISH KUMAR JAIN, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 516/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.516, 517 & 518/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Manish Kumar Jain C/O. Maa Padmavati Rice Industries, Ramadhin Marg, Rajnandgaon-491 441 Pan: Adnpj1476F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant

For Appellant: Shri S. R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 282

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025; and (iii) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025, the said delay of 29 days involved in the captioned appeals is condoned…..” 3. At the time of hearing, parties herein conceded that the facts, circumstances

MANISH KUMAR JAIN, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 517/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.516, 517 & 518/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Manish Kumar Jain C/O. Maa Padmavati Rice Industries, Ramadhin Marg, Rajnandgaon-491 441 Pan: Adnpj1476F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant

For Appellant: Shri S. R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 282

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025; and (iii) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025, the said delay of 29 days involved in the captioned appeals is condoned…..” 3. At the time of hearing, parties herein conceded that the facts, circumstances

MANISH KUMAR JAIN, RAJNANDGOAN,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 518/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.516, 517 & 518/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Manish Kumar Jain C/O. Maa Padmavati Rice Industries, Ramadhin Marg, Rajnandgaon-491 441 Pan: Adnpj1476F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant

For Appellant: Shri S. R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 282

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025; and (iii) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025, the said delay of 29 days involved in the captioned appeals is condoned…..” 3. At the time of hearing, parties herein conceded that the facts, circumstances

HEM LAL SAHU, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.473/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Hem Lal Sahu Ram Nagar, Gali No.4, Shitla Para, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Egpps3559K

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act should enquire regarding veracity of the submissions made by the assessee. However, this is a case as evident, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC goes into some other premises which was not the subject matter of the condonation submitted by the assessee. In such circumstances, in my considered view as per condonation petition placed

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 26/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 27/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 28/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 29/RPR/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, BASTAR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 20/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 21/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN, NARAYANPUR,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 24/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker

RAJMAL JAIN,NARAYANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANKER

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 25/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.20 To 29/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Rajmal Jain Ward No.3, Tahsilpara, Main Road, Narayanpur, Dist. Bastar Chhattisgarh (C.G.)-494 661 Pan: Aoupj1700Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sulesh Koshal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)

TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025 and on a careful consideration of the contents in the said condonation application, I am of the considered view that delay in 3 Rajmal Jain Vs. ITO, Kanker