NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay occurred in filing the appeals before the CIT(Appeals). The relevant contents of the condonation application are culled out as follows: “1. The Appellant derives income from hosiery business

MICKEY SHRIVASTVA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condonation of delay. He has also filed an application for raising additional ground on 26-12-2022. 2. It is first hearing and no adjournment found on records by either side. 3. The assessee paid Rs. Nil /- against demand of Rs. 19,30,510/-. The revenue involved is lower higher prescribed limit specified in CBDT Circular no 17/2019 dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1), RAIPUR vs. MESERSS CHHATTISGARH STATEELECTRICITY BOARD, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.31/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board (Through Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited) Dangania Raipur Pan : Aabcc7876Q ……""यथ" / Respondent

condoned. 23. Admittedly, the appeal filed by the Revenue involves a delay of 3966 days, which, as stated by the Ld. A.R and, rightly so, is an inordinate delay. 29 DCIT, Circle-4(1), Raipur Vs. M/s. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Considering that the Revenue had delayed filing the present appeal before us, i.e., filed the appeal after the lapse

SHRI OM PARSHAVNATH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, DURG,DURG vs. ACIT-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 23/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Om Parshvanath Developers Private Limited Nadi Road, Ganjpara, Durg (C.G)-491 001 Pan: Aamcs7665N

business turnover; and (ii) large share premium received in a year. 3. Thereafter, the A.O vide his order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, dated 29.12.2016, inter alia, made two additions, viz. (i) estimated addition to the income of the assessee company based on conviction that the assessee ought to have followed percentage completion method : Rs.30

UPENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, JAGDALPUR,BASTAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-JAGDALPUR, BASTAR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 192/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Upendra Singh Chauhan Nayapara, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh-494 001. Pan : Afupc3193D ………. अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Jagdalpur (C.G.) ………""यथ" / Respondent

condonation of delay, if any, involved in filing of the present appeal. 3. Shri S.R. Rao, the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short, ‘AR) for the assessee took us through the application of the assessee, which is supported by an “affidavit” dated 13.10.2023, stating as under: “(a) That the applicant was deriving income from truck plying business

SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD-1, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 15 & 16/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sangh C/O. Santosh Parekh, Near Hanuman Mandir, Near Itwari Bazar, Dhamtari, Chhatisgarh-493 773 Pan : Aahas5883K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

condonation of delay u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act. The Commissioners will while entertaining such belated applications in filing Form No.10B shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. [Further, all such pending applications as well as applications received henceforth shall be disposed off preferably within three months from

SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 15 & 16/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sangh C/O. Santosh Parekh, Near Hanuman Mandir, Near Itwari Bazar, Dhamtari, Chhatisgarh-493 773 Pan : Aahas5883K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

condonation of delay u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act. The Commissioners will while entertaining such belated applications in filing Form No.10B shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. [Further, all such pending applications as well as applications received henceforth shall be disposed off preferably within three months from

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

delay involved in filing of the present appeal, therefore, I am of the considered view that the same having occasioned on account of bonafide reasons merits to be condoned. 3. As the assessee by raising the aforesaid additional grounds of appeal has sought adjudication of issues involving purely legal issues which would not require looking any further beyond the facts

RAM CHAND PANJWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 151/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ram Chand Panjwani M/S. Gurunanak Rice Mill, Vill : Tulshi, P.O. Tilda, Neora, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Afbpp5595D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

business premises of Shri Sanjay Sharma, Hanuman market, Raipur and Shri Kamlesh Kesharwani, commission Agent, Ramsagarpara, Raipur on 15.03.2016, which revealed that certain rice millers would procure bogus bills from brokers/entry operators without any actual purchase of goods. It was observed by the A.O that substantial incriminating material evidencing the aforesaid facts were found in the course of the aforesaid

RAJKUMAR THADWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.257/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Rajkumar Thadwani 1-Raju Krishi Kendra, Amardeep Talkies Road, Banstal, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adbpt0267A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-4(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay of 515 days involved in the captioned appeal is condoned. 5 Rajkumar Thadwani Vs. ITO, Ward-4(4), Raipur 4. It is noted that as per Paras 4, 5.3 to 7 of the impugned order, the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC vide an ex-parte order had dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non-compliance by the assessee

VISHWANATH GUPTA, MANENDRAGARH,MANENDRAGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BILASPUR, BILASPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am

business. The assessee had declared total commission income of Rs.57,33,000/- in his Profit & Loss account of the relevant year and after claiming loss of Rs.11,21,889/- and considering incomes under various heads, the resultant income was declared in ITR. In the assessment, the Ld. Assessing Officer (‘AO’) made disallowance of discount of Rs.1,49,845/- and addition

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

business of banking, paddy procurement, sale of fertilizers, seeds and pesticides and controlled items under public distribution system (PDS), had filed its return of income for A.Y.2014-15 on 07.02.2015, declaring an income of Rs. Nil. Subsequently, the case of the assessee society was selected for scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 5. Assessment was framed

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

business of banking, paddy procurement, sale of fertilizers, seeds and pesticides and controlled items under public distribution system (PDS), had filed its return of income for A.Y.2014-15 on 07.02.2015, declaring an income of Rs. Nil. Subsequently, the case of the assessee society was selected for scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 5. Assessment was framed

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

business of banking, paddy procurement, sale of fertilizers, seeds and pesticides and controlled items under public distribution system (PDS), had filed its return of income for A.Y.2014-15 on 07.02.2015, declaring an income of Rs. Nil. Subsequently, the case of the assessee society was selected for scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 5. Assessment was framed

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

business of banking, paddy procurement, sale of fertilizers, seeds and pesticides and controlled items under public distribution system (PDS), had filed its return of income for A.Y.2014-15 on 07.02.2015, declaring an income of Rs. Nil. Subsequently, the case of the assessee society was selected for scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 5. Assessment was framed