SHANTI PARBOILING INDUSTRIES,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.99/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

undisclosed income under income disclosure scheme 2016 ; 3. The under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Assessing Officer erred in presuming and holding the purchases made from the four parties totaling Rs.2,97,87,500/- as 'bogus', merely on the basis of statement recorded of third party Shri Kamlesh Kesharwani u/s.131 of Income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX, RAIPUR vs. BALAJEE LOHA PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 356/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

undisclosed income of the assesse company.". 5.5 Apropos, explanation about the source of investment, Ld. AR further submitted that the First investor i.e., GIPL has raised share capital of Rs.21.31 Crores in the AY 2011-12, that the said shareholders has opted for VSVS-2020 and has paid the due tax on total share capital of Rs.23.21 Crores

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

delay of 597 days has been condoned and the matter remanded back to this Bench based on similar observation vide order dated 10.03.2025 in Tax Case No. 209/2024. The same is only referred to and not extracted for the sake of brevity. 4. Regarding merits, the parties herein submitted that the facts, circumstances and the issues involved in both these

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

delay of 597 days has been condoned and the matter remanded back to this Bench based on similar observation vide order dated 10.03.2025 in Tax Case No. 209/2024. The same is only referred to and not extracted for the sake of brevity. 4. Regarding merits, the parties herein submitted that the facts, circumstances and the issues involved in both these

DINESH KUMAR SINGH,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, RAIGARH, RAIGARH

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.426/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dinesh Kumar Singh Sonumuda, Kali Mandir, Ward No.42, Raigarh (C.G.)-496 001 Pan: Cqmps5008L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Raigarh (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

undisclosed income and determined the income of the assessee at the same amount. 4 Dinesh Kumar Singh Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Raigarh 3. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals). As the assessee despite having been afforded three opportunities i.e. on 31.12.2020, 12.12.2023 and 10.01.2024 had failed to participate in the proceedings before the first

RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA, AMBIKAPUR,SURAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFFICER, WARD-2, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

condone the delay of 479 days. 4. That, regarding merits, the assessment in the case of the assessee was completed u/sec. 144 of the Act and it was a time when e-proceedings had started, a notice u/sec. 142(1) along with questionnaire was served on the assessee through regd. e-mail ID and speed post also. However, there

VIVEK AGARWAL,KORBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1,, KORBA

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

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

condone the delay of 58 days in filing the present appeals by the assessee and the appeals are heard finally. 3. The assessee in this appeal has raised the following grounds of appeal :- 1. In the facts and circumstances of the ease and in law, the Id. Commissioner of lncome tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming Id. Assessing Officer

SHREEMANGAL ROLLING MILLS PVT LTD,RAIGARH vs. ACIT-2(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 268/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shreemangal Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. C/O. Kailash Chandra Agrawal, Station Road, Kharsia, Raigarh (C.G.)-496 661 Pan : Aajcs0895F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.)

undisclosed income being sale proceeds of immovable property. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any ground/s before or at the time of hearing.” 2. At the threshold of hearing of the appeal, we find that the appeal filed by the assessee is time-barred by 2 days. The assessee has filed a letter dated

MOHAMMED USMAN, BHILAI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.180/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mohammed Usman C/25, Nandini Road, Power House, Bhilai-490 011, Dist. Durg Pan: Aafpu9292H

delay of 58 days involved in the present appeal is condoned. 5. In this case, the assessee has filed both legal grounds as well as grounds on merits. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that he would assail the legal ground first and if the said legal ground is answered affirmative, then the grounds on merits shall become academic

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

SARTHAK ISPAT PVT. LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A No. 14 & Ita Nos. 513, 514, 515, 516 & 517/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20)

condonation of delay. 6. It is noticed that there are the common, interconnected and identical issues involved in the captioned appeals arising from the orders of Ld. AO passed on an even date, having common findings. The orders passed by Ld. AO u/s 153A are assailed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), which are decided by the First

YOGESH KUMAR VERMA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-4(5), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 305/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

undisclosed investment which is unjustified & is liable to be deleted.” Gr. No. 3 "The appellant craves leave, to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any ground/s before or at the time of hearing." 3. At the outset, it is noticed that the present matter is barred by limitation, being the filing of appeal before us has been delayed

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, 2, RAIGARH(CG) vs. SHRI SHRI BISHAMBHAR DAYAL AGRAWAL, JASHPUR (C.G.)

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 223/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer-2, Raigarh (C.G.)

condone the delay therein involved. On further appeal, it was the claim of the assessee that as it had assailed the validity of the jurisdiction that was assumed by the A.O u/s.153C of the Act, which was purely an issue of law, therefore, there was no justification on the part of the Tribunal in refusing to consider such significant issue

INDO LAHRI BIO POWER LTD, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.529/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Indo Lahri Bio Power Limited 38, Saheed Smarak Complex, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaaci9125K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

condone the impugned delay of 346 days (as pointed out by the registry) involved in filing of the present appeal by the assessee company. 7. Succinctly stated, the assessee company had filed its return of income for A.Y.2017-18 on 02.11.2017, declaring an income of Rs.Nil. Subsequently, the case of the assessee company was selected for scrutiny assessment u/s.143

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