ROKADIYA WAHID, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 127 & 128/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Rokadiya Wahid C/O. Mohd. Dilawar Rokadia, Mahalaxmi Enclave, Sihawa Road, Dhamtari-493 773 Pan : Acfpw4546A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

84,160/- has been sustained. 4. Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee at the threshold of hearing of the appeal submitted that the present appeal involves a delay of 22 days. It was submitted by him that the delay in filing of the appeal had occasioned because the assessee had delayed the depositing

BUNDELAS SECURITAS AND CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 59 & 60/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Bundelas Securities & Consultants Pvt. Ltd. L-38, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 223 Pan : Aaccb6831H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

condone the delay involved in filing of the present appeals by the assessee appellant. 9. Apropos the disallowance of the assessee’s claim for deduction of the delayed deposit of the employee’s share of contribution of Rs.1,44,91,662/- towards, viz. (i). ESI: Rs.17,35,445/-; and (ii). PF: Rs.1,27,56,216/- (wrongly mentioned by the assessee

BUNDELAS SECURITAS AND CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 59 & 60/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Bundelas Securities & Consultants Pvt. Ltd. L-38, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 223 Pan : Aaccb6831H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

condone the delay involved in filing of the present appeals by the assessee appellant. 9. Apropos the disallowance of the assessee’s claim for deduction of the delayed deposit of the employee’s share of contribution of Rs.1,44,91,662/- towards, viz. (i). ESI: Rs.17,35,445/-; and (ii). PF: Rs.1,27,56,216/- (wrongly mentioned by the assessee

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

condoning the delay in filing the appeal and affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) 1 Das Processors vs. ITO-1, Rajnandgaon did not decide the appeal on merit. The assessee has also raised the issue that the Ld. Assessing Officer (‘AO’) has not carried out the requisite enquiries/investigation/ verification as directed by the Ld. Principal

SATPAL SINGH SANDHU,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 04/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Satpal Singh Sandhu 151/2, Ward -1, Sandhu Bhavan, Guru Govind Singh Marg, Heerapur, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Cseps7315E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

condoning the delay of 41 days involved in filing of the present appeal. 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee who is a labour contractor had e-filed his return of income for A.Y.2019-20 on 05.11.2019, declaring an income of Rs.24,12,846/-. The return of income filed by the assessee was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act, wherein after making

ANISH VISHNOI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.764/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Anish Vishnoi New Bus Stand Baloda Bazar, Baloda Bazar S.O., Raipur (C.G.)-493 332 Pan: Aeapv0087J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

delay of 5 days involved in the present appeal is condoned keeping in view of the directives in the judgments viz. (i) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors, reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC); (ii) Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025; (iii) Jagdish

BIPUL PAUL, PANKHANJORE,KANKER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-KANKER, KANKER

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 504/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18)

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), dated 26.09.2024, for the Assessment Year 2017-18, which in turn arises from the order u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 17.12.2019, passed by Income Tax Officer, Ward- Pakhanjore, (in short “Ld. AR”). 2 Bipul Paul Vs. ITO, Ward-Kanker 2. The grounds of appeal raised

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

84,000/- school and institutions 5. Expenses on plantation & Rs. 6,28,91,000/- Rs. 6,28,91,000/- others 6. Other welfare expenses- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- Rs. 1,57,70,000/- LPG 7. Social Overheads-Power & Rs. 33,09,02,500/- Rs.33,09,02,500/- Fuel 8. Other contractual works

DHARAMPAL MALIK, BEMETARA,BEMETARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(3), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.266 & 267/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2017-18 Dharampal Malik Rakhi Joba, Tehsil Saja, Post- Deokar, Bemetara (C.G.)-491 331 Pan: Befpm9373E

delay of 485 days involved in both these appeals are hereby condoned and the matters are heard on merits. 4. That so far as merits of the case are concerned, both the parties conceded that the facts and circumstances and issue involved in these appeals are absolutely identical and similar, therefore, having heard the submissions of the parties, both these