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

Condonation of delay: It is noticed that there is a delay of approximately 3170 days. It is not just and proper at this stage to raise the issue after a gap of almost 3170 days. It is for general welfare that a period be put on litigation. Further, it is a general principle of law that law is made

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

Condonation of delay: It is noticed that there is a delay of approximately 3170 days. It is not just and proper at this stage to raise the issue after a gap of almost 3170 days. It is for general welfare that a period be put on litigation. Further, it is a general principle of law that law is made

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

Condonation of delay: It is noticed that there is a delay of approximately 3170 days. It is not just and proper at this stage to raise the issue after a gap of almost 3170 days. It is for general welfare that a period be put on litigation. Further, it is a general principle of law that law is made

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

Condonation of delay: It is noticed that there is a delay of approximately 3170 days. It is not just and proper at this stage to raise the issue after a gap of almost 3170 days. It is for general welfare that a period be put on litigation. Further, it is a general principle of law that law is made

SANDEEP KAUR GILL,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/934, Shukla Colony, Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

penalty of Rs.3,17,452/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act by the A.O. 3 Sandeep Kaur Gill Vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Raipur ITA Nos. 267 & 268/RPR/2022 4. Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee at the threshold of hearing of the appeal submitted that the present appeal involves a delay

SANDEEP KAUR GILL,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/934, Shukla Colony, Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

penalty of Rs.3,17,452/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act by the A.O. 3 Sandeep Kaur Gill Vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Raipur ITA Nos. 267 & 268/RPR/2022 4. Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee at the threshold of hearing of the appeal submitted that the present appeal involves a delay

SANDEEP KAUR GILL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER. WARD 3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.236/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/102, Shukla Colony, Ravi Shankar, Shukla Ward, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay of 873 days involved in the present appeal is condoned. 7. On a perusal of the record, it is evident from Paras 3.2 and 4 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 in limine. For the sake of clarity

LATE SHANTI MOHTA,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.71/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Late Shanti Mohta 15/391, Jawahar Nagar, Ravigram S.O Chhattisgarh- 492 001 Pan: Aldpm6184F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay of 46 days involved in the present appeal is condoned. 6. At the time of hearing Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that as evident from Para 7.1 to 8 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

RAKESH KUMAR, BHILAI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), BHILAI,, DURG

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 140/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

penalty orders through postal service on 31/08/2022 and 30/09/2022. But the present appeal is filed on 17.04.2023 i.e., after lapse of more than 7 months. The delay in filing the appeal upto 30.09.2022 may be condoned

M/S GULZAR-MOKSH(JV), JAGDALPUR,BASTAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAGDALPUR, BASTAR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.166/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Gulzar-Moksh (Jv) Gulzar Niwas, Geedam Road, Jagdalpur (C.G)-494 001 Pan: Aanfg4916A ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Jagdalpur (C.G) ……""यथ" / Respondent

condoned. 5. On a perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, it is observed that the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without dealing with the merits of the case. In our considered view, once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(Appeals), it becomes obligatory on its part to dispose

LOKESH KUMAR NAYAK, MAHASAMUND,MAHASAMUND vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.149/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Lokesh Kumar Nayak Ward No.12, Thakurdiya Khurd Masamund (C.G.)-493 551 Pan: Baypn3445D ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

condoned. 6. On a perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, it is observed that the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without dealing with the merits of the case. In our considered view, once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(Appeals), it becomes obligatory on its part to dispose

SURESH KUMAR AGRAWAL,BILASPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2(1), BILASPU, BILASPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 370/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Suresh Kumar Agrawal Contractor Main Road, Post-Lormi, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 115 Pan: Adlpa9083B

delay of 491 days, involved in the captioned appeal is condoned. 5. At the very outset, it is noted that the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had wrongly observed that the assessee has opted to avail the benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and considering the said fact, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Further, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC

DAS PROCESSORS,RAJNANDGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BHILAI 1(1), BHILAI

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.394/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Das Processors 44, Vardhman Nagar, Jain School Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aaifd6768Q

delay of 109 days involved in the present appeal is condoned. 7. At the very outset it is noted that as evident from Para 4 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 5 Das Processors Vs. DCIT-1(1), Bhilai assessee

ASIF ALI,NAWAGARH AMBIKAPUR vs. ITO WARD 1 AMBIKAPUR, KHARASIYA ROAD AMBIKAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.159/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Asif Ali Nawagarh Ambikapur, Surguja (C.G)-497 001 Pan: Aoypa3486J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay of 54 days involved in the present appeal is condoned. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that as evident from Paras 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 of the impugned order, the Ld.CIT(Appeals) /NFAC vide an ex-parte order had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine due to non-compliance

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

delay of 30 days involved in each of the appeals is condoned. 4 Omax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, Central Circle (2), Raipur ITA Nos. 415 to 418/RPR/2025 4. That for illustration on merits, parties herein conceded that the facts and circumstances as well as issues involved in all these appeals are absolutely similar and identical, therefore, all these matters

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

delay of 30 days involved in each of the appeals is condoned. 4 Omax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, Central Circle (2), Raipur ITA Nos. 415 to 418/RPR/2025 4. That for illustration on merits, parties herein conceded that the facts and circumstances as well as issues involved in all these appeals are absolutely similar and identical, therefore, all these matters

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

delay of 30 days involved in each of the appeals is condoned. 4 Omax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, Central Circle (2), Raipur ITA Nos. 415 to 418/RPR/2025 4. That for illustration on merits, parties herein conceded that the facts and circumstances as well as issues involved in all these appeals are absolutely similar and identical, therefore, all these matters

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

delay of 30 days involved in each of the appeals is condoned. 4 Omax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, Central Circle (2), Raipur ITA Nos. 415 to 418/RPR/2025 4. That for illustration on merits, parties herein conceded that the facts and circumstances as well as issues involved in all these appeals are absolutely similar and identical, therefore, all these matters