THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-2(1)BHILAI, BHILAI(CG) vs. M/S SMS SHIVNATH INFRASSTRUCTURE PVT LTD., DURG, DURG(CG)

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.87/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Acit-2(1), Bhilai Vs M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.107/Rpr/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Vs Pr.Cit-2, Raipur Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

TDS under law such disallowance would ultimately increase assessee‟s profits from business of developing housing project. The ultimate profits of assessee after adjusting disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would qualify for deduction u/s. 80IE of the Act would qualify for deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act. This view was taken by the courts

BHARAT BENEFICATION & POWER PVT. LTD., RAIGARH,RAIGARH vs. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 336/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

section 263, the short synopsis submitted before us is extracted hereunder for the sake of clarity: Bharat Benefication & Power Pvt. Ltd., Raigarh AY 2018/19 Submission of assessee 1. Rs. 70 lakh Sky Alloys & Power Pvt. Ltd. i) Impugned assessment reopened on the issue of alleged bogus purchases from two parties. ii) In the reopened assessment, as per the settled

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

section 68 of the Act and issue 3 regarding compensation of Rs. 71,75,902/- claimed as exemption u/s 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, were queried and compliance/ explanations were sought from the assessee. Necessary response was furnished by the assessee. However, on perusal of the response of the assessee on the queries raised, Ld. PCIT has observed that

RAJENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.130/Rpr/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rajendra Kumar Agrawal Vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Gandhi Chowk Tax, Raipur-1 Neora, Raipur (C.G.) 493114 Pan No. Acipa 5919L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारितीती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Praveen Goyel, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई ाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/08/2023 घोषणाणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24 /08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Dated 16.03.2023 U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “ 1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Passed By Id. Pr. Cit-1, Raipur U'S 263 Of The Act Dated 16/03/2023 Is Illegal & Void- Ab-Initio, 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit-1. Raipur Failed To Demonstrate That How The Order Passed By The Ao Is Erroneous Which Caused Prejudice To The Revenue. 3. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit-1. Raipur Has Stated In The Order That No Adverse Inference Is Drawn On The Issues Raised In Notice U/S 263, However, Set Aside The Proceedings Initiated U/S 263 Of The Act, Hence, The Same Is Contradictory & Incorrect. 4. The Appellant Craves To Add, Alter Or Delete Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal During The Course Of Appellate Proceedings,”

section 263 for initiation of revisionary proceedings. Notice u/s 263 of the Act was issued on 03.05.2023 alleging that the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) dated 22.05.2021 is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of Revenue on the following grounds: “2. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny

M/S SWASTIK ESTATE, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.178/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Swastik Estates V The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Office No.301 To 304, 3Rd Floor, S Raipur-1 Subham Corporate, Telibandha, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Adkfs8832R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S. K. Meena, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R

TDS has indeed been done in the same previous year, but has been paid in the Government account after the due date of filing of return. Here, it is worthwhile to mention that the notice for the hearing by a mistake mentioned the Section 43B in place of Section 40(a)(ia). However, the assessee has filed no reply

ANAND KUMAR BANSAL,BILASPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR -1, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.133/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anand Kumar Bansal Madhya Nagari Chowk, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan: Ahnpb0374N

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 are inclined to condone the delay of 299 days. We order accordingly. 4. At the time of hearing, when the matter was call up for hearing

M/S HARDAYAL SINGH PATEL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1,, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 189/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Hardayal Singh Patel 43, Golden Homes, Vip Estate, Khamardih (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aabfh5997A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 263 of the Act is unsustainable as power to revise can be invoked in the case of no NIL enquiry and not in the case of inadequate enquiry. The order made by the Ld. Pr.CIT u/s 263 of the Act, is illegal, invalid, void and bad in law and is liable to be quashed. 5. The appellant reserves

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos. 184 to 191/RPR/2022 1. The power to make an adjustment by disallowing a deduction or relief claimed in the return can be invoked only when the claim is prima facie inadmissible Bank of America v DCIT 200 ITR 739). Prima facie in this sub-section means clear or self-evident, meaning thereby that the claim must

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, LAWAN,BALODA BAZAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHATAPARA, BALODA BAZAR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

TDS on commission received on paddy procurement business, as under: Sl. Particulars Amount in Rs. No. 1. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.15,44,096/- deduction of interest income u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 2. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.6,81,955/- deduction of profit from paddy procurement business

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, LAWAN,BALODA BAZAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHATAPARA, BALODA BAZAR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

TDS on commission received on paddy procurement business, as under: Sl. Particulars Amount in Rs. No. 1. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.15,44,096/- deduction of interest income u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 2. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.6,81,955/- deduction of profit from paddy procurement business

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, LAWAN,BALODA BAZAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHATAPARA, BALODA BAZAR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

TDS on commission received on paddy procurement business, as under: Sl. Particulars Amount in Rs. No. 1. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.15,44,096/- deduction of interest income u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 2. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.6,81,955/- deduction of profit from paddy procurement business

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, LAWAN,BALODA BAZAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHATAPARA, BALODA BAZAR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

TDS on commission received on paddy procurement business, as under: Sl. Particulars Amount in Rs. No. 1. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.15,44,096/- deduction of interest income u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 2. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim for Rs.6,81,955/- deduction of profit from paddy procurement business