TORAN LAL VERMA, BHILAI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.573/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Toran Lal Varma House No.39, Ward-3, Village: Kachandur, Post-Karanja, Bhilai-490 024 (C.G.) Pan: Akfpv6450J

section 253(3) of the Act the appeal ought to have been filed within two months from the end of month in 3 Toran Lal Varma Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhilai which the order sought to appeal against was passed i.e. by 31/05/2025. However, owing to the earlier professional advice the appeal has now been filed after a delay

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1)), BHILAI vs. SHRI SANJAY JAIN, BHILAI

In the result ground no. 06 of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No: Ita 55/Rpr/2020 (Assessment Years:2014-15) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, V Shri Sanjay Jain, Bhilai S C/O M/S Sidhharth Industries, Plot No. 38, Industrial Estate, Bhilai, C.G. Pan: Aet Pj1859D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ravi Agarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 23-08-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 09-11-2023 Pronouncement

TDS cannot be applied on such payments, consequently, disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) was bad in law, thus, the same is directed to be deleted. Ground No. 1 of the revenue is, thus, dismissed in terms of aforesaid observations. 8 Sanjay Jain Ground NO. 2: disallowance

ALANKAR ALLOYS PVT. LTD. , KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 428, 429 & 430/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2020-21 Alankar Alloys Private Limited C/O. Subash Agrawal & Associates Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aafca9127J

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, we condone the delay of 253, 240 & 88 days, respectively involved in the captioned appeals. 6. At the very outset, it is noted that as per Para

ALANKAR ALLOYS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 428, 429 & 430/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2020-21 Alankar Alloys Private Limited C/O. Subash Agrawal & Associates Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aafca9127J

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, we condone the delay of 253, 240 & 88 days, respectively involved in the captioned appeals. 6. At the very outset, it is noted that as per Para

ALANKAR ALLOYS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 428, 429 & 430/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2020-21 Alankar Alloys Private Limited C/O. Subash Agrawal & Associates Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aafca9127J

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, we condone the delay of 253, 240 & 88 days, respectively involved in the captioned appeals. 6. At the very outset, it is noted that as per Para

THE DY. CIT- 1,, DURG(CG) vs. M/S. RAVI SHREE NARAYAN TRANSPORT,, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act of Rs.61,25,026/- out of interest and finance charges as per provisions of” 3. Whether in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.32,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit in partners capital account

DY.C.I.T. 1, BHILAI(CG) vs. M/S RAVI SHREE NARAYAN TRANSPORT, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act of Rs.61,25,026/- out of interest and finance charges as per provisions of” 3. Whether in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.32,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit in partners capital account

DY.C.I.T. 1, BHILAI(CG) vs. M/S RAVI SHREE NARAYAN TRANSPORT, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act of Rs.61,25,026/- out of interest and finance charges as per provisions of” 3. Whether in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.32,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit in partners capital account

DY. C.I.T.1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. JSPL,, RAIGARH(C.G)

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member Dcit-1(1), Bilaspur- Vs Jspl, 495004 Kharsia Road, Raighagh(Cg) Pan No. : Aabcj 4683 J (Appellant) .. Tsednepser Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Dr Assessee By : Shri Mayank Jain, Ar Date Of Hearing : 12/01/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 15/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Bilaspur, Dated 31.03.2014 For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. The Sole Grievance Of The Revenue Is That The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Amount To The Extent Of Rs.2,10,89,707/- Out Of Disallowance Of Rs.3,36,18,098/- Made By The Ao Under The Head Corporate Social Responsibility Expenses. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Domestic Company, A Subsidiary Of Jindal Steel &.Power Limited (Jspl). It Derives Income From Power Generation & Mining. The Company Has Commenced The Commercial Generation Of Thermal Power From Its First Of The Four Units Of 250Mw Each From 08.12.2007. The Assessee Company Filed Its Income Tax Return For The Year Under Consideration Declaring

section 135 the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been made mandatory for companies having net worth of Rs. 500 crores or more OR having turnover of Rs. 1000 crore or more OR having net profit of Rs. 5 crores or more during any financial year, such company has to expend minimum 2% of net profit in CSR activities

KAILASH CHAND AGRAWAL,KORBA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KORBA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 274/Rpr/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-2009 Kailash Chand Agrawal Prop. Shree Balaji Road Carrier T.P. Nagar, Korba – 495679 (C.G) Pan : Adnpa 6830 G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Dy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba - 495679 (C.G.) ……""थ" / Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Shri G. S. Agrawal Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 09/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/02/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Jamlappa D. Battull, Am; Against The First Appellate Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - Appeals, Bilaspur [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Vide Order Dt 07/03/2016 Which Emanated Out Of An Order Of Rectification [For Short “Ro”] Dt 06/08/2013 For Ay 2008-2009 Passed By The Assessing Officer [For Short “Ao”] U/S 154 Of The

253. 2. The solitary issue under present appeal is that, the appellant assessee challenges the direction of Ld. CIT(A) issued to Ld. AO for initiating remedial action u/s 147 of the Act. 3. Before advancing the matter on facts for adjudication, it is necessary to reproduce ground challenged by the appellant assessee as under; “1. That under the facts

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, BHAKHARA, KURUD,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, BHENDRI,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, KURUD,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, BHAKHARA,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, KODEBOD,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, DOMA,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, BHAKHARA,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, KODEBOD,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

253/ hence the net profit from the PDS business comes to Rs 23,767/ and full amount is eligible for deduction u/S80P(2)(GJ(11) for such other business. (v) The Learned AO has only allowed a general deduction of Rs 50,000/ U/S 80P(2)(GJ(11) whereas the entire income of the society is deductible