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 and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C

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 and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C

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 and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C

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 and was required to make TDS as per provision of section 194A, 194C

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

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M P P W D DN,,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BHILAI

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 294/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Executive Engineer, M P P W D Dn P W Division (B/R) G.E. Road, Kailash Nagar, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Tan: Jbpe00177C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

194C of the Act, as under : 3 Executive Engineer, M P P W D DN Vs. ITO (TDS), Bhilai 4 Executive Engineer, M P P W D DN Vs. ITO (TDS), Bhilai Based on the aforesaid fact, the A.O. held the assessee in default and saddled it with liability towards tax u/s. 201(1) of Rs. 85,199/- and interest

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

Section 194C of the Act, therefore, the A.O disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act 30% of the said expenditure and worked out a disallowance of Rs.15,98,210/-(sic). However, the A.O while culminating the assessment vide his order passed u/s.143(3) dated 30.12.2017, inter alia, disallowed, viz. (i) assessee’s claim for deduction of tendu patta plucking

SHRI CHANKI RAMWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.551/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Chanki Ramwani, Plot No.11/12, Phase-I/Ii, Shri Ram Nagar, Shankar Nagar, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Anypr6711J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

condone the impugned delay of 152 days (as pointed out by the registry) in filing of the present appeal by the assessee. 8. Succinctly stated, the assessee who is engaged in the business of transportation had e-filed his return of income for A.Y.2016-17 on 27.02.2017, declaring an income of Rs.8,68,430/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee

HARISH PANDEY, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 503/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

section 147 r.w.s. 148, 148A, 149, 151 and 151A of the Act. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in upholding order of learned Assessing Officer making addition of Rs.87,07,200/- as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and charging the same