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

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

Section 263 is unsustainable and is passed without properly appreciating the facts and evidence on record. The assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. 2. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or modify any of the ground/s of appeal.” 3. At the outset, Registry pointed that the present appeal is barred by limitation

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

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)

Section 143(2) or that any prejudice was caused to the assessee in defending the case against it. We are not, therefore, prepared to think that the assessment order is invalid on the ground contended by the assessee. 13. In such circumstances, answering the aforesaid Question of law in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee this appeal

SHRISHTI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH CENTRE,KORBA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, all the captioned appeals i

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.100 & 101/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shrishti Institute Of Medical Science & Research Centre, Pandey Complex Near Petrol Pump, Niharika, Korba-495677 (C.G.). Pan : Aacas5201L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.102/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Saksham Mig-1 Ameri Sagar Dwip, Sagar Dwip Ameri, Bilashpur-495001(C.G.). Pan : Aaeas6801Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal

condonation of the delay in filing its audit report in “Form No. 10BB” was declined by him, as under:- 4 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 5 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 4. We have heard

SAKSHAM,BILASPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, all the captioned appeals i

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.100 & 101/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shrishti Institute Of Medical Science & Research Centre, Pandey Complex Near Petrol Pump, Niharika, Korba-495677 (C.G.). Pan : Aacas5201L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.102/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Saksham Mig-1 Ameri Sagar Dwip, Sagar Dwip Ameri, Bilashpur-495001(C.G.). Pan : Aaeas6801Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal

condonation of the delay in filing its audit report in “Form No. 10BB” was declined by him, as under:- 4 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 5 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 4. We have heard

SHRISHTI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH CENTRE,KORBA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, all the captioned appeals i

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.100 & 101/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shrishti Institute Of Medical Science & Research Centre, Pandey Complex Near Petrol Pump, Niharika, Korba-495677 (C.G.). Pan : Aacas5201L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.102/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Saksham Mig-1 Ameri Sagar Dwip, Sagar Dwip Ameri, Bilashpur-495001(C.G.). Pan : Aaeas6801Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal

condonation of the delay in filing its audit report in “Form No. 10BB” was declined by him, as under:- 4 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 5 Shrishti Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre & Ors. vs. CIT(E) ITA No. 100, 101& 102/RPR/2020 4. We have heard

DAS PROCESSORS,RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1 RAJNANDGAON, RAJNANDGAON

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 780/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19) Das Processors, 44 Vardhman Nagar Vs Income Tax Officer-1 Jain School Road, Rajnandgaon, Rajnandgaon, Fci Road, Chhattisgarh-491441 Near Raipur Naka Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh-491441 Pan: Aaifd6768Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None. राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement

section 144 rws 263 of the Act, the assessee filed belated appeal (66 days) before the Ld. CIT(A), who did not condone the delay

TECHNOBLAST MINING CORPORATION,RAIGARH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed, in terms of our observations herein above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.133/Rpr/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Technoblast Mining Corporation Pcit (Central), 19, 2Nd Floor Krishna Complex, Raipur Chaitanya Nagar, Raigarh – 496 001

delay was condoned, and the matter was permitted for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the case culled out of the material on records are that, the assessee is a firm, engaged in the business of mining contract and electronically filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.7,62,87,530/- on 24.10.2017. Thereafter, the case was selected

SANTOSH PANDEY, AMBIKAPUR,SURGUJA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.127/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

condone the delay involved in filing of the present appeal before us. 7. Adverting to the merits of the case, it transpires that the case of the assessee was reopened for bringing to tax the cash deposits of Rs.15 lacs and Rs.18 lacs in the assessee’s bank account during the year under consideration, which

AWANISH PANDEY, AMBIKAPUR,SURGUJA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.128/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

263 of the Act before the Pr. CIT, Raipur, we find substance in his claim that delay in filing of the present appeal had occasioned because of his unawareness about his right to assail the impugned order before the Tribunal. Be that as it may, as the delay in filing of the present appeal does not smack of any malafide

SHREE KRISHNA COLONISERS,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee M/s Shree Krishna Colonisers in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 95/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shree Krishna Colonisers V Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax- 0, Nemichand Gali, Ganj Para Ward S Pcit, Raipur-I No.5, Ram Sagar Para, Raipur, 492001, Chhattisgarh Pan: Abffs7335G (Ita No. 96/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shree Krishna Builders Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax- 5/425, Nemichand Gali, Ramsagar Para Pcit, Raipur-I Ward, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pan: Aacft1716A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R. B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 14.12.2023 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

delay cannot be condoned. Therefore, we agree with the contentions of the learned Counsel for the assessee that the report of the Valuation Officer has to be filed within the time given u/s 142A(vi) of the Act and therefore, the assessment order passed on the basis of such report of Valuation Officer beyond the time limit is not sustainable

SHREE KRISHNA BUILDERS,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee M/s Shree Krishna Colonisers in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 95/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shree Krishna Colonisers V Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax- 0, Nemichand Gali, Ganj Para Ward S Pcit, Raipur-I No.5, Ram Sagar Para, Raipur, 492001, Chhattisgarh Pan: Abffs7335G (Ita No. 96/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shree Krishna Builders Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax- 5/425, Nemichand Gali, Ramsagar Para Pcit, Raipur-I Ward, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pan: Aacft1716A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R. B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 14.12.2023 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

delay cannot be condoned. Therefore, we agree with the contentions of the learned Counsel for the assessee that the report of the Valuation Officer has to be filed within the time given u/s 142A(vi) of the Act and therefore, the assessment order passed on the basis of such report of Valuation Officer beyond the time limit is not sustainable

ANAND KUMAR BANSAL,BILASPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR -1, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.133/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anand Kumar Bansal Madhya Nagari Chowk, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan: Ahnpb0374N

condone the delay of 299 days. We order accordingly. 4. At the time of hearing, when the matter was call up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The hearing of the present case had started since 24th April, 2025 and as per the order sheet entries and in the entire span of time, the matter was posted

MAHESH PRASAD SINGH,AMBIKAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.196/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mahesh Prasad Singh Vs The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vidyanagar, Sector-3, Raipur-1 Beside Sant Harkewal School, Ambikapur (C.G.)-497 001 Pan: Bbvps9072H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Debashis Lahiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 18.03.2023 U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For Ay 2011-12. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. Ld. Pr. Cit Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Sec. 263 & In Setting Aside The Assessment Order For Fresh Enquiry. Order Passed U/S 263 Is Unsustainable & Is Passed Without Properly Appreciating The Facts & Evidences On Record. The Assessment Order Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. 2. The Appellant Reserves The Right To Add, Amend Or Modify Any Of The Ground/S Of Appeal.”

condone the delay and permit the appeal of the assessee to place for hearing. 3. Brief facts in this case are that the return of income was not filed by the assessee u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 whereas the assessee deposited cash of Rs. 38,10,100/- in his saving bank account during the financial year

HIMANSHU GOYAL,DHAMTARI vs. PR. CIT-1, RAIPUR

In the result legal grounds raised by the assessee under present appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.144/Rpr/2022 (Assessment Years: 2012-2013) Himanshu Goyal, Vs Pr.Cit, Raipur-1, Raipur Nawagaon Road, Dhamtari, 793773, (C.G.) Pan No. :Agtpg1746Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Praveen Goyal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the matter is permitted for hearing and adjudication on merits. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 31/07/2012 declaring total income at Rs.6,88,010/-. Thereafter on the basis of certain information, which was believed that the income of the assessee chargeable

CHHATTISGARH STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LTD,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 242/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Chhattisgarh State Beverages Corporation Limited Aabkari Bhavan, Chokra Nala, Labhandi, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc3163B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

section 263 r.w.s. 143(3) and by making disallowance the claim for VAT payment of Rs.53,65,46,087/- which is a Statutory Liability levied by the State Government is unjustified, unwarranted and bad in law. 4. Ground 4: That assessee has filed First Appeal on 30.03.2022 vide Appeal no. NFAC/2014-15/10107392. The case of assessee has been rejected vide Order

MAHESH PRASAD SINGH, AMBIKAPUR,SURGUJA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

Appeals stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 117/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12)

condone the delay and allow the appeal for adjudication. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual having Income from sale & purchase of Coal and transporting of coal with his own trucks. The assessee did not file the Return of Income u/s 139(1) for the AY 2011-12. As per information received from

GRAMIN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, LAWAN,BALODA BAZAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHATAPARA, BALODA BAZAR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood

delay and condone the same. 5 Gramin Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit ITA No. 202/RPR/2023 & 6 others 4. Briefly stated, the assessee which is a primary agricultural co- operative society engaged in the business of banking, paddy procurement, sale of fertilizer, seeds, manures and pesticides as well as sale of controlled items under the Public Distribution System