BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BHILAI, DURG

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.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

166 days. 5. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal bearing ITA No.351/RPR/2023. 6. We direct that the Director of the Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” At this juncture, the captioned appeals are again fixed for hearing today i.e. on 03.04.2025 before the Tribunal

BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BHILAI, DURG

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.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

166 days. 5. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal bearing ITA No.351/RPR/2023. 6. We direct that the Director of the Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” At this juncture, the captioned appeals are again fixed for hearing today i.e. on 03.04.2025 before the Tribunal

BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BHILAI, DURG

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.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

166 days. 5. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal bearing ITA No.351/RPR/2023. 6. We direct that the Director of the Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” At this juncture, the captioned appeals are again fixed for hearing today i.e. on 03.04.2025 before the Tribunal

BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (TDS), BHILAI, DURG

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.364 To 368/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.) Pan: Jbpbo1308G

166 days. 5. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal bearing ITA No.351/RPR/2023. 6. We direct that the Director of the Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” At this juncture, the captioned appeals are again fixed for hearing today i.e. on 03.04.2025 before the Tribunal

VIDYA SHANKAR JAISWAL, PRATAPPUR ,SARGUJA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AMBIKAPUR, SARGUJA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.350 & 351/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Bhagat Singh, Ward No.2, Pratappur, Sarguja-497 223 (C.G.) Pan : Algpj6801P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

166 days. 5. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal bearing ITA No.351/RPR/2023. 6. We direct that the Director of the Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” At this juncture, the captioned appeals are again fixed for hearing today i.e. on 20.03.2025 before the Tribunal. 3. On perusal

VIDYA SHANKER JAISWAL, PRATAPPUR,SARGUJA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.350 & 351/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Bhagat Singh, Ward No.2, Pratappur, Sarguja-497 223 (C.G.) Pan : Algpj6801P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

166 days. 5. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal bearing ITA No.351/RPR/2023. 6. We direct that the Director of the Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.” At this juncture, the captioned appeals are again fixed for hearing today i.e. on 20.03.2025 before the Tribunal. 3. On perusal

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

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 237/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

166 days. 4. In view of the aforesaid principle laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court, we are of the considered view that the delay in filing of appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) for 873 days deserves to be condoned and the matter should be adjudicated afresh based on merits of the case and facts available on record

VINEET SINGH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT. LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, BILASPUR, BILASPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 239/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2012-13)

166 days. 9. In view of above and also for the reason shown by the appellant/assessee. coupled with the fact though the application of the appellant was supported by the affidavit, but the revenue did not file any counter-affidavit controverting the reason assigned by the assessee and, as such, the delay of 371 days occurred in filing the appeal

SUNIL SPONGE PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.748/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sunil Sponge Private Limited Plot No.96-97, Phase-Ii, Industrial Area, Siltara, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Aahcs7999A

delay of 3 days is condoned and the appeal is heard on merits. 3 Sunil Sponge Private Limited Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Raipur 5. In this case, the assessee has filed both legal grounds as well as grounds on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that he would assail the legal ground first and if the said

ASSOCIATION OF REPUTED INSTITUTE OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DURG,DURG vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.198/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Association Of Reputed Institute Of School Education Arora Krishi Farm, Near Berla Road, Bijabhat, Bemetara, Durg-491 335 Pan: Aadaa1895M

166 taxmann.com 525 had provided relief to the assessee directing the CPC to provide exemption to the assessee holding that the requirement of Section 12A of the Act has been complied with since the assessee had filed audit report within the 4 Association of Reputed Institute of School Education Vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward-2, Raipur (C.G.) extended due date. That

M/S. G.P. INFRAVENTURES ,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(4), RAIPUR

The appeal of the department stands disposed off

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No.76/Rpr/2020) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer Ward-1(4), V M/S G.P. Infraventures, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, S Shree Tower, Shankar Nagar, Central Revenue Building, Raipur (C.G.) Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aanfg6074B (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) : (""यथ" / Respondent) (Ita No.94/Rpr/2020) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S G.P. Infraventures, V Income Tax Officer-1(4), Shree Tower, Shankar Nagar, S Raipur Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aanfg6074B (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of : 23.11.2023 7Pronouncement

166 Taxman 307, P&H HC, (ii) 25 taxmann.com 464 (Jodhpur ITAT), Vaishali Builders & Colonizers vs Addl. CIT [2012], (iii) ACIT vs Punjab Urban Development Authority, Mohali, [2014] 42 taxmann.com 160 (Chandigarh - Trib.) and various other decisions. 9.6 On the contrary, the case of CIT vs SS Ahluwalia, [20141 46 taxmann.com 169 (Delhi), is more appropriate and relevant. In this

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), RAIPUR vs. MESERS G P INFRAVENTURES, RAIPUR

The appeal of the department stands disposed off

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No.76/Rpr/2020) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer Ward-1(4), V M/S G.P. Infraventures, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, S Shree Tower, Shankar Nagar, Central Revenue Building, Raipur (C.G.) Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aanfg6074B (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) : (""यथ" / Respondent) (Ita No.94/Rpr/2020) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S G.P. Infraventures, V Income Tax Officer-1(4), Shree Tower, Shankar Nagar, S Raipur Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aanfg6074B (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of : 23.11.2023 7Pronouncement

166 Taxman 307, P&H HC, (ii) 25 taxmann.com 464 (Jodhpur ITAT), Vaishali Builders & Colonizers vs Addl. CIT [2012], (iii) ACIT vs Punjab Urban Development Authority, Mohali, [2014] 42 taxmann.com 160 (Chandigarh - Trib.) and various other decisions. 9.6 On the contrary, the case of CIT vs SS Ahluwalia, [20141 46 taxmann.com 169 (Delhi), is more appropriate and relevant. In this

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