PRIYESH SINGHANIA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.462/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Priyesh Singhania 730/1, Radha Kunj, Opposite Vip Guest House, Pahuna, Shankar Nagar Main Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aoups7838A ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed condonation petition a/w. affidavit dated 28.07.2025. It was submitted by the Ld. Counsel that a rectification application u/s. 154

MAHESWARI PANCHAYAT BALOD,BALOD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.137, 138, 139 & 140/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Maheshwari Panchayat Balod Rajnandgaon, Balod, Chhattisgarh-491 226 Pan: Aaaam7320E

u/s. 154 of the Act. That as per Section 154(7) of the Act, no amendment shall be made after expiry of four years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be amended was passed. In this case, there is delay of 9 years. The fact of the matter remains, this itself

MAHESWARI PANCHAYAT BALOD,BALOD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.137, 138, 139 & 140/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Maheshwari Panchayat Balod Rajnandgaon, Balod, Chhattisgarh-491 226 Pan: Aaaam7320E

u/s. 154 of the Act. That as per Section 154(7) of the Act, no amendment shall be made after expiry of four years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be amended was passed. In this case, there is delay of 9 years. The fact of the matter remains, this itself

MAHESWARI PANCHAYAT BALOD, BALOD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.137, 138, 139 & 140/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Maheshwari Panchayat Balod Rajnandgaon, Balod, Chhattisgarh-491 226 Pan: Aaaam7320E

u/s. 154 of the Act. That as per Section 154(7) of the Act, no amendment shall be made after expiry of four years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be amended was passed. In this case, there is delay of 9 years. The fact of the matter remains, this itself

MAHESWARI PANCHAYAT BALOD, BALOD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.137, 138, 139 & 140/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Maheshwari Panchayat Balod Rajnandgaon, Balod, Chhattisgarh-491 226 Pan: Aaaam7320E

u/s. 154 of the Act. That as per Section 154(7) of the Act, no amendment shall be made after expiry of four years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be amended was passed. In this case, there is delay of 9 years. The fact of the matter remains, this itself

MITESH SINGHANIA,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2) RAIPUR, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.410/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Mitesh Singhania Singhania Bhawan, Subhas Road, Near Telghani Naka, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Avops1474P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur (C.G) ……""यथ" / Respondent

rectification order u/s 154 against the intimation u/s 143(1), nor subsequent order u/s 154 has been passed subsequent to filing of this appeal for the year under consideration. Q2. Whether any regular assessment order u/s 143(3) has been passed for the present year subsequent to filing of this appeal. If yes, the conclusion drawn therein with a copy

SIDHARTH CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT & THRIFT SOCIETY LIMITED,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), BHILAI, BHILAI

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 241/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sidharth Co-Operative Credit & Thrift Society Limited 01, Nayapara, Titrudhi, Durg (C.G.)- 490 020 Pan : Aagas2471Q

delay of 24 days in filing of 4 Sidharth Co-operative Credit & Thrift Society Limited Vs. ITO-2(1), Bhilai the present appeal had occasioned because of circumstances that could neither be attributed to any deliberate conduct nor any lackadaisical approach on the part of the assessee appellant, thus, we condone the same. 5. Succinctly stated, the assessee

RESHAM GRAMODYOG SADAN, CHAMPA,AT/POST- UMRELI,VIA-CHAMPA,TAHSIL-BARPALI,KORBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KORBA (C.G.), MAHANADI COMPLEX, NIHARIKA ROAD, KORBA (C.G.)

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. 533/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Resham Gramodyog Sadan Village : Umreli Main Road, Champa, Janjgir-Champa, Korba-495 677 Pan: Aacar9348D ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay, the assessee submitted that they had filed a rectification application u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) and the assessee was waiting for the outcome of such rectification application. However, the said rectification application has been rejected vide order dated 08.09.2023 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 21.10.2023 i.e. within

VIKAS MANDGE,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 2(1), BILASPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observation

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 75/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vikas Mandge 71/4, In Front Of Samta Park, Nehru Nagar, West, Dist- Durg-490020 (C.G) Pan : Aedpm7615L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-2(1) Bilaspur. ……""यथ" / Respondent

rectification of mistake in the revised return, before the CIT(Appeals), which therein involved a delay of 42 days. After considering the facts leading to the delay in filing of the appeal, the CIT(A), in all fairness, though condoned the same, but not A.Y.2010-11 finding favour with the contentions advanced by the assessee, therein, dismissed the appeal

RAJENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, DURG,DURG vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.744/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Rajendra Kumar Shrivastava, Mig-42, Padmanabhpur, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan: Alops3921M

154, it may be disposed of by that authority even after the expiry of the statutory time limit, on merits and in accordance with law, Circular: No. 73, dated 7- 1-1972. 3. In view of the above fact the rectification application order not passed with in six months from my application and view of circular no. 68 dated 17/11/1971

TRILOKI NATH MISHRA, RAIGARH,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, RAIGARH, RAIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.185/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Triloki Nath Mishra House No.34, Bar Chowk, Chotiguda, Raikera, Raigarh-496 111 (C.G.) Pan: Aovpm4665G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Raigarh (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

rectification u/s. 154 of the Act. Subsequently, the advising counsel at the relevant point of time was of the opinion that even when the petition u/s. 154 of the Act would be pending, an appeal before the Tribunal was still maintainable and at the behest of such advice from the then Counsel the assessee had again refiled the appeal which

SHRI LAXMAN BHAI DAHYA BHAI PATEL,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), BHILAI

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 29/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Laxman Bhai Dahya Bhai Patel Padmanabhpur, Patel Complex, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan : Aafl8291J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

rectification order u/s. 154 of the I.T.Act, 1961. Thus, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in adjudicating the disallowance which was non existent addition and beyond jurisdiction. 2. Without prejudice to the above :- On the fact and circumstances of the case, the Honorable CIT-A has erred in sustaining a disallowance of Rs.22,05,816/- out of total disallowance

ANIL NACHRANI,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 47/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

154. The bench minutely analyzed law in this regard and applying the principle of 'coram non judice' and following aforesaid judgments of the supreme court, it was held that if an assessee seeks to challenge the reassessment proceedings as being without jurisdiction, when action for rectification is sought to be taken on the assumption of the validity of the reassessment

MARUTI CLEAN COAL AND POWER LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 55/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Maruti Clean Coal & Power Ltd. Ward No.42, Building No.14, Civil Lines, Near Income Tax Colony, Chhattisgarh-492 001. Pan : Aadcm4810C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor & Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocates. Revenue By :Shri P. K Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2022

condonation of the impugned delay involved in filing of the present appeal by the assessee appellant. 2.2 We have given a thoughtful consideration and considering the circumstances leading to the impugned delay involved in filing of the present appeal r.w the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble Apex Court admit the same. 3. We shall first deal with the additional

ARUNA TIWARI,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 90/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Aruna Tiwari 762, Sundar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adbpt4977B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay is found to be covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020 dated 23.03.2020, which was thereafter modified vide further order(s) dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021, 23.09.2021 and 10.01.2022, as per which for the purpose of limitation the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 was to be excluded