DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1), RAIPUR vs. MESERSS CHHATTISGARH STATEELECTRICITY BOARD, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.31/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board (Through Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Limited) Dangania Raipur Pan : Aabcc7876Q ……""यथ" / Respondent

condoned. 23. Admittedly, the appeal filed by the Revenue involves a delay of 3966 days, which, as stated by the Ld. A.R and, rightly so, is an inordinate delay. 29 DCIT, Circle-4(1), Raipur Vs. M/s. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board Considering that the Revenue had delayed filing the present appeal before us, i.e., filed the appeal after the lapse

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 in filing of appeal is therefore condoned and appeal admitted. 5.3 The appellant has raised several grounds of appeal, all of which are however against the single issue of taxing the maturity proceeds received from life insurance policy upon its surrender. Facts involved in the issue is that the appellant is an individual and had taken a life insurance

V Y INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am

254 of the Act, we therefore, hereby condone the delay in filing this appeal as we are satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not presenting this appeal within the prescribed time. Accordingly, delay is condoned in the interest of substantial justice. 8. Now, after condonation of delay by us, we will decide this appeal on merit

RAJU JHANGHEL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 445 & 446/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Raju Janghel, C/E Beside Trivenia Vs Income Tax Officer-1(2), Office Of Houshal Pan Thela, Gudhiyari, Ito-1(2), Cr Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492001. Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492001 Pan: Agrpj0572D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 05.02.2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

254 of the Act, we hereby condone the delay in filing this appeal as we are satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not presenting this appeal within the prescribed time. 11. The Ld. AR drew our attention to the grounds of appeal taken before the Ld. CIT(A) as per Form No. 35, wherein, the addition had been challenged

RAJU JHANGHEL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 445 & 446/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Raju Janghel, C/E Beside Trivenia Vs Income Tax Officer-1(2), Office Of Houshal Pan Thela, Gudhiyari, Ito-1(2), Cr Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492001. Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492001 Pan: Agrpj0572D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 05.02.2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

254 of the Act, we hereby condone the delay in filing this appeal as we are satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not presenting this appeal within the prescribed time. 11. The Ld. AR drew our attention to the grounds of appeal taken before the Ld. CIT(A) as per Form No. 35, wherein, the addition had been challenged

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

delay in filing of appeal is therefore condoned and appeal admitted. 5.3 The appellant has raised several grounds of appeal, all of which are however against the single issue of taxing the maturity proceeds received from life insurance policy upon its surrender. Facts involved in the issue is that the appellant is an individual and had taken a life insurance

VISHWANATH GUPTA, MANENDRAGARH,MANENDRAGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BILASPUR, BILASPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am

section 254 of the Act, we therefore, following the above mentioned decisions, hereby condone the delay in filing this appeal as we are satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not presenting this 3

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -1, BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -1, BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR vs. MESERS SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

3)/147 of the Act reassessed the income of the assessee company at Rs.802.71 crore (approx.) 9 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases 31.03.2008 The CIT(Appeals) vide his order passed in Appeal No.49/CIT/ABSP for A.Y.2006-07, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee against the reassessment order. 04.06.2008 The Revenue challenged the order of the CIT(Appeals) dated 31.03.2008 (arising

PRADEEP KUMAR KHANDELWAL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.46/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Pradeep Kumar Khandelwal 10/683, Sector Balaji Nagar, Shivnand Nagar, Wrs Colony, Raipur-492 008 (C.G.) Pan: Bjypk5882N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

condoned the delay of 309 days and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal to adjudicate afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits. 4. Now coming to the merits of the case, the facts as emanated clearly from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC are extracted as follows: “5. DECISION: In this case, the assessment

DISTRICT PROJECT LIVELIHOOD COLLEGE SOCIETY,GARIYABANDH(CG) vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 271, 272 & 273/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19)

254(2) was pending before the tribunal cannot justify the delay in filing of appeal before the High Court. The appellant was required to furnish the sufficient cause together with the evidence for the claim made. This has not been done. Therefore, it held that the reasons given for condonation of delay does not tantamount to sufficient cause within