JAI GURUDEV INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,BILASPUR vs. PR. CIT, BILASPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No. 65/Rpr/2020 अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16) (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jai Gurudev Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Principal Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम C-11, Netaji Complex, Jarhabhata, Income-Tax, Vs. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh Bilaspur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccj 1895 R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 29.07.2021 सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing 14.10.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia - Am:

2) are applied then in such a situation the CIT is not allowed to exercise its power u/s263 merely because the AO has accepted the capital gain declared by the assessee. Jai Gurudev Infrastructure Pvt Ltd Vs. PCIT AY : 2015-16 Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned ex-parte order passed by the Id PCIT

ANAND SURANA,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.192/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Anand Surana, Nanesh Kripa, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aosps5275H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

2(14)(iii) of the Act was available on record; (ii) that no documents were available on record which would corroborate that the lands in question were used for agricultural purposes for two years immediately preceding the date of transfer as per clause (ii) of Section 10(37) of the Act; and (iii) the lands were acquired

M/S SMS SHIVNATH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,DURG(CG) vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, RAIPUR (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) ..

2. The Appellant filed its original return of income for the AY under appeal electronically on 28.9.2012 declaring income of Rs. 1,13,05,394. Copy of acknowledgement of ITR as well as computation of income enclosed at pages 39-42 of the paper book filed by the Assessee. The declared income comprised of income from capital gains and income

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) ..

2. The Appellant filed its original return of income for the AY under appeal electronically on 28.9.2012 declaring income of Rs. 1,13,05,394. Copy of acknowledgement of ITR as well as computation of income enclosed at pages 39-42 of the paper book filed by the Assessee. The declared income comprised of income from capital gains and income

DCIT,1(1), RAIPUR (CG) vs. SMT VIMLESH KUMAR SINGH, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member Dcit-1(1), Raipur Vs Late Shri Vijay Pal Singh, Through L/H Smt. Vimlesh Kumari Singh, Prop.M/S Manohar Engineering & M/S Sharda Engineering, Baikunth, District – Raipur Pan No. : Ahjps 0124 K (Appellant) .. Tsednepser Revenue By : Mrs. Shital Verma, Dr Assessee By : Shri K.P.Dewani, Ar Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2018 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), Raipur, Dated 08.02.2013 For The Assessment Year 2006-2007. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- “1. Whether In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.1,98,28,636/- Made By The Ao By Treating Long Term Capital Gain As Income From Undisclosed Sources.” 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Ao Observed That The Shares On Sale Of Which Ltcg Of Rs.1.95,39,611/- Was Shown & Exemption U/S.10(38) Of The Act Was Claimed Were Held Barely For Little More Than One Year To Qualify The Same As Long Term Capital Asset. The Cost Of The Shares Was Rs.2,69,400/- & Sale Consideration Was Rs.1,98,28,636/-. He

section 10(38) of the Act. We find that assessee has purchased the shares through off market deal and therefore such transaction for purchase of shares by the assessee ought not to have been registered with the Calcutta Stock Exchange. Secondly, the Voucher for shares sold to the assessee issued by M/s Badri Prasad & Sons, broker of the Calcutta Stock

SATYA POWER AND ISPAT LTD.,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. Nos.51 & 52/Rpr/2021 अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14) (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Satya Power & Ispat Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम First Floor, V R Plaza, Income-Tax, Vs. Link Road, Central Circle-2, Bilaspur-495001 (Cg) Raipur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs 4472 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Amit Maloo Jain, Ca अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 30.07.2021 सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing 29.09.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia - Am:

2) of the Act. Subsequently, after both the returns stood concluded, a search was conducted in the premises of the assessee on 08.02.2017. Assessment was consequently carried out under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.12.2018 for both the assessment years in question. 4. Subsequently, the revisional authority, i.e. PCIT, called for the assessment records

SATYA POWER AND ISPAT LTD.,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. Nos.51 & 52/Rpr/2021 अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14) (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Satya Power & Ispat Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम First Floor, V R Plaza, Income-Tax, Vs. Link Road, Central Circle-2, Bilaspur-495001 (Cg) Raipur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs 4472 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Amit Maloo Jain, Ca अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 30.07.2021 सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing 29.09.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia - Am:

2) of the Act. Subsequently, after both the returns stood concluded, a search was conducted in the premises of the assessee on 08.02.2017. Assessment was consequently carried out under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.12.2018 for both the assessment years in question. 4. Subsequently, the revisional authority, i.e. PCIT, called for the assessment records

DILIP SANGOI,RAIPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

capital gains chargeable under section 145 of the Act and endorsed by the A.O. to be plausible. 8.3 The revisional power exercised in the facts of the case is plainly without authority of law. Consequently, the revisional order passed under section 263 is liable to be quashed and set aside. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ARVIND SANGOI,RAIPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

capital gains chargeable under section 145 of the Act and endorsed by the A.O. to be plausible. 8.3 The revisional power exercised in the facts of the case is plainly without authority of law. Consequently, the revisional order passed under section 263 is liable to be quashed and set aside. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

SURESH CHAND SURANA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 25/Rpr/2021) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17)

2) BILL, 2014 - Memorandum explaining the Provisions relating to direct taxes is reproduced below for sake of clarity: The existing provisions contained in sub-section (1) of section 54, inter alia, provide that where capital gain arises from the transfer of a long-term capital asset, being buildings or lands appurtenant ITA No. 25/RPR/2021 (Suresh Chand Surana

SMT. PUSHPA JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 263 of the Act as had been looked into by the Hon’ble Courts deal with the two issues which goes to the very foundation of the present appeal, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the Pr. CIT while exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act had rightly concluded that the subject land

SMT. SUSHILA DEVI JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 263 of the Act as had been looked into by the Hon’ble Courts deal with the two issues which goes to the very foundation of the present appeal, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the Pr. CIT while exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act had rightly concluded that the subject land

SANJOG JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 263 of the Act as had been looked into by the Hon’ble Courts deal with the two issues which goes to the very foundation of the present appeal, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the Pr. CIT while exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act had rightly concluded that the subject land

SANKET JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 263 of the Act as had been looked into by the Hon’ble Courts deal with the two issues which goes to the very foundation of the present appeal, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the Pr. CIT while exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act had rightly concluded that the subject land

SMT. TILOTTAMA JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 263 of the Act as had been looked into by the Hon’ble Courts deal with the two issues which goes to the very foundation of the present appeal, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the Pr. CIT while exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act had rightly concluded that the subject land

SAMPAT LAL JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 263 of the Act as had been looked into by the Hon’ble Courts deal with the two issues which goes to the very foundation of the present appeal, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the Pr. CIT while exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act had rightly concluded that the subject land

SANJOG JHABAK L/H OF LATE GAUTAM CHAND JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 263 of the Act as had been looked into by the Hon’ble Courts deal with the two issues which goes to the very foundation of the present appeal, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the Pr. CIT while exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act had rightly concluded that the subject land

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, PACHEDA, ABHANPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.114/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Village- Pacheda, Block-Abhanpur, Chhatisgarh-493 661 Pan : Aaaag9886H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this 14 Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Vs. ITO-1(1) amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities

THE GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), RAIPUR (CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society is not carrying on any separate