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

RAJESH KUMAR SINGHANIA HUF,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.848/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar Singhania Huf B-22/12, Sector-3, Udaya Society, Tatibandh, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aadhr1548F

30 days involved in the present appeal and the matter is heard on merits. 4. That the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had dismissed the appeal of the assesse in limine by not condoning the delay of 9 days. The relevant observations of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC are extracted as follows: “5.1.3. In view of the fact that the appeal is filed

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the merits of the case could not be discarded solely on the ground of delay. A liberal approach, therefore, should be taken

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the merits of the case could not be discarded solely on the ground of delay. A liberal approach, therefore, should be taken

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the merits of the case could not be discarded solely on the ground of delay. A liberal approach, therefore, should be taken

OMAX MINERALS PVT LTD., KOLKATA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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. 415, 416, 417 & 418/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Omax Minerals Private Limited C/O. Subhash Agrawal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1 Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700 069 Pan: Aabco5774H ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the merits of the case could not be discarded solely on the ground of delay. A liberal approach, therefore, should be taken

MANAV RACHNA EDUCATION SOCIETY,RAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 01/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Manav Rachana Education Society, A-1, Pushpak Apartments, Opp. Government School, Chhotapara, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aaaac6228R . ......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

section 10(23C)(vi), the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax can exercise any such power”. On the basis of the aforesaid position of law, we are of the considered view that as the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Bhopal was not vested with any power to condone the delay involved in filing of the application by the assessee society under

KAMLESH SHARMA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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: 70/Rpr/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2020-21) Kamlesh Sharma, House No.109, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Harihant Nagar, Sarona, Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Ring Road No.1, Raipur-492001, Cg Building, Civil Lines, Raipur-492001 Pan: Bppps4514C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None (Adjournment Petition Filed) राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 06/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: This Appeal For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2020-21 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.12.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [‘Cit(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’), Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

30,407/- of STCG 7. Total income/Loss determined Rs.1,62.46,830/- 4. Aggrieved with the reassessment order, the assessee filed belated appeal (126 days) before the Ld. CIT(A), who did not admit the appeal as he was not 3 Kamlesh Sharma vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1) satisfied with the condonation delay petition. The relevant para of the impugned order

CHHATTISGARH RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,RAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 16 & 17/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2019-20 & 2020-21 Chhattisgarh Rajya Open School Madhyamik Siksha Mandal, Pension Road, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aaagc0179F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal. ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 10(23C)(vi), the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax can exercise any such power”. On the basis of the aforesaid position of law, we are of the considered view that as the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Bhopal was not vested with any power to condone the delay involved in filing of the application by the assessee society under

CHHATTISGARH RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,RAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 16 & 17/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2019-20 & 2020-21 Chhattisgarh Rajya Open School Madhyamik Siksha Mandal, Pension Road, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aaagc0179F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal. ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 10(23C)(vi), the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax can exercise any such power”. On the basis of the aforesaid position of law, we are of the considered view that as the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), Bhopal was not vested with any power to condone the delay involved in filing of the application by the assessee society under

GURMEET SINGH HORA,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 358, 359 & 360/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22)

30 days, the delay thereafter cannot be condoned without there being compelling grounds as advocated by the Hon'ble Courts, 3. Since the appellant has failed to show any "sufficient cause" u/s 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the appellant's failure to file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation

GURMEET SINGH HORA,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 358, 359 & 360/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22)

30 days, the delay thereafter cannot be condoned without there being compelling grounds as advocated by the Hon'ble Courts, 3. Since the appellant has failed to show any "sufficient cause" u/s 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the appellant's failure to file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation

GURMEET SINGH HORA,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 358, 359 & 360/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22)

30 days, the delay thereafter cannot be condoned without there being compelling grounds as advocated by the Hon'ble Courts, 3. Since the appellant has failed to show any "sufficient cause" u/s 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the appellant's failure to file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation

SHRIKANT SHARMA, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.148/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shrikant Sharma Village: Birjhapur, Taluka: Dhamdha, Dist: Durg-491 331 (C.G.) Pan: Cayps4948D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the merits of the case could not be discarded solely on the ground of delay. A liberal approach, therefore, should be taken

DEPUTY DIRECTOR (GEOLOGY & MINING), RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS/TCS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DEPUTY DIRECTOR (GEOLOGY & MINING), RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS/TCS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come

DISTRICT MINING OFFICER, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

delay therein involved has certain justifiable reasons as demonstrated by the aforementioned assesses, which do not smack of any malafide intention or lackadaisical approach on their part, therefore, we deem it fit to condone the same without imposing any cost. Once again, as a word of caution, we may herein observe that the officers/staff members in the times to come