GANESHAN PURUSHOTHAMAN ACHARI,BHILAI, DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(4), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 146 To 148/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 Ganeshan Puroshothaman Achari 116, Friends Arcade, Shastri Nagar, G.E. Road, Supela, Bhilai (C.G.) Pan : Achpa6510E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru. ……""यथ" / Respondent

condone the delay of 11 days involved in filing of the captioned appeals. 6. Succinctly stated, the assessee who is engaged in the business of trading and installation of air conditioners had e-filed his return of income for A.Y.2017-18 on 30.10.2017, declaring an income of Rs.11,18,100/-. The return of income filed by the assessee was processed

GANESHAN PURUSHOTHAMAN ACHARI,BHILAI, DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(4), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 146 To 148/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 Ganeshan Puroshothaman Achari 116, Friends Arcade, Shastri Nagar, G.E. Road, Supela, Bhilai (C.G.) Pan : Achpa6510E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru. ……""यथ" / Respondent

condone the delay of 11 days involved in filing of the captioned appeals. 6. Succinctly stated, the assessee who is engaged in the business of trading and installation of air conditioners had e-filed his return of income for A.Y.2017-18 on 30.10.2017, declaring an income of Rs.11,18,100/-. The return of income filed by the assessee was processed

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

KUNJ BIHARI DAWA DUKAN, AMBIKAPUR,SURGUJA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.122/Rpr/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Kunj Bihari Dawa Dukan Pcit Opp. Govt. Distt. Hospital, Raipur - 1 Bilaspur Road Ambikapur, Surguju Chhattisgarh – 497 001

delay. It was explained that out of 409 days 388 days were covered by the relief in limitation granted by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the wake of the pandemic COVID, regarding remaining 21 days, it was the submission of Learned AR that the Counsel of the assessee, Mr. Vijay Jaiswal was unwell during those days thus the appeal couldn