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

8. On a perusal of the record, the assessee appellant had filed all the captioned appeals before the CIT(Appeals), NFAC, involving a delay of 3170, 3177, 3177, 2155, 2162, and 2335 days. The assessee appellant has filed condonation applications dated 04.05.2023 a/w. “affidavits” dated 9th May, 2023 explaining the reasons leading to the delay in filing the respective appeals

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

8. On a perusal of the record, the assessee appellant had filed all the captioned appeals before the CIT(Appeals), NFAC, involving a delay of 3170, 3177, 3177, 2155, 2162, and 2335 days. The assessee appellant has filed condonation applications dated 04.05.2023 a/w. “affidavits” dated 9th May, 2023 explaining the reasons leading to the delay in filing the respective appeals

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

8. On a perusal of the record, the assessee appellant had filed all the captioned appeals before the CIT(Appeals), NFAC, involving a delay of 3170, 3177, 3177, 2155, 2162, and 2335 days. The assessee appellant has filed condonation applications dated 04.05.2023 a/w. “affidavits” dated 9th May, 2023 explaining the reasons leading to the delay in filing the respective appeals

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

8. On a perusal of the record, the assessee appellant had filed all the captioned appeals before the CIT(Appeals), NFAC, involving a delay of 3170, 3177, 3177, 2155, 2162, and 2335 days. The assessee appellant has filed condonation applications dated 04.05.2023 a/w. “affidavits” dated 9th May, 2023 explaining the reasons leading to the delay in filing the respective appeals

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

8. On a perusal of the record, the assessee appellant had filed all the captioned appeals before the CIT(Appeals), NFAC, involving a delay of 3170, 3177, 3177, 2155, 2162, and 2335 days. The assessee appellant has filed condonation applications dated 04.05.2023 a/w. “affidavits” dated 9th May, 2023 explaining the reasons leading to the delay in filing the respective appeals

SHRI JAVED ALI PRADHAN,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.294 & 295/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 V. Smt. Fazila Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Akppp 6380 B] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.297 To 299, 300 & 301/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07 V. Shri Javed Ali Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Agbpa 1758 J] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Akshay Ringasia, Ca & Mr.Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Satya Prakash – Sharma, Sr.Dr / Smt.Ila M.Parmar, Cit-Dr : 07.08.2023 सुनवाई ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीखरीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023

8 :: no words in observing that the same does not merit acceptance. In fact, if I condone the inordinate delay involved in the present cases where the assessee had consistently delayed filing of appeals even before the CIT(Appeals), and also not participated in the assessment proceedings, then, it would send a wrong message and would lay down a wrong

SMT SMT. FAZILA PRADHAN,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.294 & 295/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 V. Smt. Fazila Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Akppp 6380 B] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.297 To 299, 300 & 301/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07 V. Shri Javed Ali Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Agbpa 1758 J] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Akshay Ringasia, Ca & Mr.Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Satya Prakash – Sharma, Sr.Dr / Smt.Ila M.Parmar, Cit-Dr : 07.08.2023 सुनवाई ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीखरीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023

8 :: no words in observing that the same does not merit acceptance. In fact, if I condone the inordinate delay involved in the present cases where the assessee had consistently delayed filing of appeals even before the CIT(Appeals), and also not participated in the assessment proceedings, then, it would send a wrong message and would lay down a wrong

SHRI JAVED ALI PRADHAN,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.294 & 295/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 V. Smt. Fazila Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Akppp 6380 B] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.297 To 299, 300 & 301/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07 V. Shri Javed Ali Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Agbpa 1758 J] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Akshay Ringasia, Ca & Mr.Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Satya Prakash – Sharma, Sr.Dr / Smt.Ila M.Parmar, Cit-Dr : 07.08.2023 सुनवाई ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीखरीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023

8 :: no words in observing that the same does not merit acceptance. In fact, if I condone the inordinate delay involved in the present cases where the assessee had consistently delayed filing of appeals even before the CIT(Appeals), and also not participated in the assessment proceedings, then, it would send a wrong message and would lay down a wrong

SMT SMT. FAZILA PRADHAN,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.294 & 295/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 V. Smt. Fazila Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Akppp 6380 B] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.297 To 299, 300 & 301/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07 V. Shri Javed Ali Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Agbpa 1758 J] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Akshay Ringasia, Ca & Mr.Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Satya Prakash – Sharma, Sr.Dr / Smt.Ila M.Parmar, Cit-Dr : 07.08.2023 सुनवाई ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीखरीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023

8 :: no words in observing that the same does not merit acceptance. In fact, if I condone the inordinate delay involved in the present cases where the assessee had consistently delayed filing of appeals even before the CIT(Appeals), and also not participated in the assessment proceedings, then, it would send a wrong message and would lay down a wrong

SHRI JAVED ALI PRADHAN,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.294 & 295/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 V. Smt. Fazila Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Akppp 6380 B] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.297 To 299, 300 & 301/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07 V. Shri Javed Ali Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Agbpa 1758 J] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Akshay Ringasia, Ca & Mr.Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Satya Prakash – Sharma, Sr.Dr / Smt.Ila M.Parmar, Cit-Dr : 07.08.2023 सुनवाई ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीखरीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023

8 :: no words in observing that the same does not merit acceptance. In fact, if I condone the inordinate delay involved in the present cases where the assessee had consistently delayed filing of appeals even before the CIT(Appeals), and also not participated in the assessment proceedings, then, it would send a wrong message and would lay down a wrong

SHRI JAVED ALI PRADHAN,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.294 & 295/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 V. Smt. Fazila Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Akppp 6380 B] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.297 To 299, 300 & 301/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07 V. Shri Javed Ali Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Agbpa 1758 J] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Akshay Ringasia, Ca & Mr.Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Satya Prakash – Sharma, Sr.Dr / Smt.Ila M.Parmar, Cit-Dr : 07.08.2023 सुनवाई ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीखरीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023

8 :: no words in observing that the same does not merit acceptance. In fact, if I condone the inordinate delay involved in the present cases where the assessee had consistently delayed filing of appeals even before the CIT(Appeals), and also not participated in the assessment proceedings, then, it would send a wrong message and would lay down a wrong

SHRI JAVED ALI PRADHAN,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees stands dismissed in terms of our observations hereinabove

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.294 & 295/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 V. Smt. Fazila Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Akppp 6380 B] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.297 To 299, 300 & 301/Rpr/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2001-02 To 2003-04, 2005-06 & 2006-07 V. Shri Javed Ali Pradhan, The Dy. Commissioner – Opp. Old Holy Heart School, Of Income Tax-1(1), Alina House, Raipur (C.G.) Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.). [Pan: Agbpa 1758 J] (अपीलार्थीर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Akshay Ringasia, Ca & Mr.Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Satya Prakash – Sharma, Sr.Dr / Smt.Ila M.Parmar, Cit-Dr : 07.08.2023 सुनवाई ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीखरीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023

8 :: no words in observing that the same does not merit acceptance. In fact, if I condone the inordinate delay involved in the present cases where the assessee had consistently delayed filing of appeals even before the CIT(Appeals), and also not participated in the assessment proceedings, then, it would send a wrong message and would lay down a wrong

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)

8. The application dated 31-05-2019 to Condon delay of filling of appeal is under consideration and fresh application dated 30-12-2022, after lapse of more than two year is bad in law and procedure. In his fresh affidavit, Para-3, the assessee stated that he was facing decline in his trade from 2014-15 and health problems

SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 237 & 238/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Suresh Kumar Gupta Prop. M/S. Mittal Roadways, A-10, G.E Road, Tatibandh Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg8248B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

8. Shri Prafulla Pendse, the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee at the very outset submitted that there is delay of 191 days involved in filing of the captioned appeals. Elaborating on the reasons leading to the aforesaid delay in filing of the appeal, it was averred by the Ld. AR that the same had occasioned

SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 237 & 238/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Suresh Kumar Gupta Prop. M/S. Mittal Roadways, A-10, G.E Road, Tatibandh Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg8248B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

8. Shri Prafulla Pendse, the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee at the very outset submitted that there is delay of 191 days involved in filing of the captioned appeals. Elaborating on the reasons leading to the aforesaid delay in filing of the appeal, it was averred by the Ld. AR that the same had occasioned

VINOD KUMAR KAILASHCHANDRA VERMA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), 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: 69/Rpr/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vinod Kumar Khailashchandra Verma, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), House No.496/9, Avanti Vihar, Sector-2, Central Revenue Building, Telibandha, Raipur-492001 (C.G.) Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G. 492001 Pan: Aanpv5964B (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:

section 250(6B) of the Act. We have also taken note of the categorical observation of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has not filed any justification for condonation of delay. After thoughtful consideration of the impugned order, we are unable to infer that whether the Ld. CIT(A) has provided any specific opportunity of being heard

SHRI OM PARSHAVNATH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,, DURG,DURG vs. ACIT-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 23/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Om Parshvanath Developers Private Limited Nadi Road, Ganjpara, Durg (C.G)-491 001 Pan: Aamcs7665N

section 5 of the Limitation Act, the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor so the case calls

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

8. No order as to costs.” (emphasis supplied by us) 31. After having given thoughtful consideration, we are of the considered view that the delay in filing the present appeal before us, as explained by the Ld. D.R had occasioned on the part of the A.O, initially due to bonafide 47 DCIT, Circle-4(1), Raipur Vs. M/s. Chhattisgarh State