DCIT-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI vs. VIJAYA DESHLAHRA, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

money by way of claiming exempted long term capital gains u/s.10(38) of the Act. The Investigation Wing briefly explained the modus operandi on the ground that usually, beneficiaries buy the penny stocks and thereafter 4 ITA.Nos.92-94/RPR/2025 COs No.08-10/RPR/2025 approach certain mediators, and through them the share prices would be rigged and artificially increased to higher prices

DCIT-1(1), BHILAI vs. VIJAYA DESHLAHRA, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

money by way of claiming exempted long term capital gains u/s.10(38) of the Act. The Investigation Wing briefly explained the modus operandi on the ground that usually, beneficiaries buy the penny stocks and thereafter 4 ITA.Nos.92-94/RPR/2025 COs No.08-10/RPR/2025 approach certain mediators, and through them the share prices would be rigged and artificially increased to higher prices

DCIT-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI vs. VIJAYA DESHLAHRA, INDORE

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

money by way of claiming exempted long term capital gains u/s.10(38) of the Act. The Investigation Wing briefly explained the modus operandi on the ground that usually, beneficiaries buy the penny stocks and thereafter 4 ITA.Nos.92-94/RPR/2025 COs No.08-10/RPR/2025 approach certain mediators, and through them the share prices would be rigged and artificially increased to higher prices

SUNITA SHERWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-4(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.506/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Sunita Sherwani S-19, Rajeev Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Attps9943C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

unexplained assets. The limbs of Section 69A of the Act stands qualified in the case of the assessee, i.e.  the assessee was found to be owner of the Money.  its nature and source is not identifiable. 8.5.3 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 while affirming the view of the Madhya

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1),, RAIPUR vs. SHRI SHARAD GOEL, RAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue stands dismissed, in terms of our observations herein above

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

unexplained capital gain thereby completely ignoring the provisions as per section 45(3) of the IT act, 1961?" 2. "Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. Rs. 5,77,59,138/-, thereby not considering and not distinguishing the findings of the AO which

SMT BUDHAREEN BAI,BHATAPARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, BHATAPARA

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Budhia Reen Bai, Ito, Near Shitala Mandir, Bhatapara (Cg). Hathanipara Ward, Vs. Bhatapara (Cg) – 493118. Pan : Bxxpb0771Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vikash Sharma, Adv. Department By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 13-05-2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 14-05-2019 O R D E R Per Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am :

money are not substantiated by any supporting documents. Also it cannot be expected that a person will advance huge sum of Rs. 30 lakhs without charging interest. The claim of assessee is an afterthought and the cash deposit is from unexplained sources. The identity of persons may have been proved, but there is no supporting document that transactions

SHRI ANAND KISHORE BAGREE,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 4(4), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained money routed to the account of beneficiary / assessee in the garb of Long term capital gain. The Ld AO has relied

SHRI RAHUL GUPTA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1) , RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.190/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta (Huf) M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aamhr5784E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.191/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aexpg9423L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.192/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Radhika Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aqfpm4577M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.193/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pawan Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg7808B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr

capital gain earned therefrom as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. Be that as it may, I shall look into the genuineness/authenticity of the transactions of purchase/sale of 3000 shares of CCL International Ltd. as had been disclosed by the assessee in its return of income for the year under consideration. 10. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies

PAWAN GUPTA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.190/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta (Huf) M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aamhr5784E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.191/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aexpg9423L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.192/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Radhika Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aqfpm4577M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.193/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pawan Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg7808B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr

capital gain earned therefrom as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. Be that as it may, I shall look into the genuineness/authenticity of the transactions of purchase/sale of 3000 shares of CCL International Ltd. as had been disclosed by the assessee in its return of income for the year under consideration. 10. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies

RADHIKA GUPTA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.190/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta (Huf) M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aamhr5784E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.191/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aexpg9423L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.192/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Radhika Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aqfpm4577M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.193/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pawan Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg7808B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr

capital gain earned therefrom as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. Be that as it may, I shall look into the genuineness/authenticity of the transactions of purchase/sale of 3000 shares of CCL International Ltd. as had been disclosed by the assessee in its return of income for the year under consideration. 10. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies

RAHUL GUPTA(HUF),RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.190/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta (Huf) M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aamhr5784E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.191/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aexpg9423L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.192/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Radhika Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aqfpm4577M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.193/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pawan Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg7808B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr

capital gain earned therefrom as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. Be that as it may, I shall look into the genuineness/authenticity of the transactions of purchase/sale of 3000 shares of CCL International Ltd. as had been disclosed by the assessee in its return of income for the year under consideration. 10. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. RAHUL KATHURIA, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

unexplained credit, invoking sec. 68. Conclusion drawn and consequent addition made by the AO is arbitrary, baseless and not justified. 2. Without prejudice to ground no. 1 above, the addition of Rs.2,04,23,038/- is illegal inasmuch as sec. 68 is not applicable to the addition made by AO. 3. Without prejudice to ground

INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAIPUR vs. RAHUL KATHURIA, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

unexplained credit, invoking sec. 68. Conclusion drawn and consequent addition made by the AO is arbitrary, baseless and not justified. 2. Without prejudice to ground no. 1 above, the addition of Rs.2,04,23,038/- is illegal inasmuch as sec. 68 is not applicable to the addition made by AO. 3. Without prejudice to ground

D.C.I.T. CENTRAL CRICLE,, RAIPUR vs. DEVI IRON & POWER PVT LIMITED, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2014 Co Nos. 30 & 31/Rpr/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Devi Iron & Power Pvt. Ltd. Mahamaya Tower, 3Rd & 4Th Floor, In Front Of Anupam Nagar, Near Varun Honda, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaeca3704G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.101/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Devi Iron & Power Pvt. Ltd. B-08-09, Sector-C, Industrial Area, Urla, Sarora, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcd9753D ……""यथ" / Respondent Co Nos.30 & 31/Rpr/2015

money from the aforesaid investor company viz. Escourt Finvest Pvt. Ltd, then the A.O could not have on the basis of surmises and conjectures rejected the said claim and drawn adverse inferences in the hands of the assessee company. Our aforesaid view is found to be fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

D.C.I.T. CENTRAL CRICLE,, RAIPUR vs. DEVI IRON & POWER LIMITED, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2014 Co Nos. 30 & 31/Rpr/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Devi Iron & Power Pvt. Ltd. Mahamaya Tower, 3Rd & 4Th Floor, In Front Of Anupam Nagar, Near Varun Honda, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaeca3704G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.101/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Devi Iron & Power Pvt. Ltd. B-08-09, Sector-C, Industrial Area, Urla, Sarora, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcd9753D ……""यथ" / Respondent Co Nos.30 & 31/Rpr/2015

money from the aforesaid investor company viz. Escourt Finvest Pvt. Ltd, then the A.O could not have on the basis of surmises and conjectures rejected the said claim and drawn adverse inferences in the hands of the assessee company. Our aforesaid view is found to be fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S DEVI IRON & POWER PVT LTD., RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2014 Co Nos. 30 & 31/Rpr/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Devi Iron & Power Pvt. Ltd. Mahamaya Tower, 3Rd & 4Th Floor, In Front Of Anupam Nagar, Near Varun Honda, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaeca3704G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.101/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Devi Iron & Power Pvt. Ltd. B-08-09, Sector-C, Industrial Area, Urla, Sarora, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcd9753D ……""यथ" / Respondent Co Nos.30 & 31/Rpr/2015

money from the aforesaid investor company viz. Escourt Finvest Pvt. Ltd, then the A.O could not have on the basis of surmises and conjectures rejected the said claim and drawn adverse inferences in the hands of the assessee company. Our aforesaid view is found to be fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

SHRIMATI EPPARI MANGAMMA,JAGDALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, JAGDALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.175/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Eppari Mangamma, New Bus Stand, Ganga Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, Baster, Pan : Aadpe4575F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Jagdalpur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

money. And also the appellant said that Rs.20 Lakhs is unexplainable here. But in A.Y. 2012-2013 assessee had already paid Capital Gain

SEEMA DEVI AGRAWAL,RAIGARH, CHHATTISGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Seema Devi Agrawal C/O. Sunil Kumar Agrawal Sewa Kund Road, Raigarh-496 001 (C.G.) Pan: Affpa4990K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

gain arising out of sale of the property was not disclosed by the assessee. Though correctness of the investment so far as purchase is concerned is there as per record, however, there has been no sale transactions entered by the assessee at all during F.Y.2014-15 relevant to A.Y.2015-16, therefore, the entire “reasons to believe” by the A.O is vitiated

OM PRAKASH VERMA,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAGDALPUR, JAGDALPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 87/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Om Prakash Verma H. No.53, Star Homes Campus, Bawadiya Kalan, Bhopal (M.P)-462 039 Pan : Aaipv9836F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Jagdalpur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

unexplained money of the assessee and made an addition of the same to his returned income. Accordingly, the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) dated 14.03.2013 determined the income of the assessee at Rs.20,57,955/-. 4. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals). It was the claim of the assessee that