MARUTI CLEAN COAL AND POWER LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 55/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Maruti Clean Coal & Power Ltd. Ward No.42, Building No.14, Civil Lines, Near Income Tax Colony, Chhattisgarh-492 001. Pan : Aadcm4810C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor & Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocates. Revenue By :Shri P. K Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2022

carry- forward of unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.1,55,66,921/-, while for its book profit u/s.115JB witnessed no modification. 4. Subsequently the A.O reopened the concluded assessment of the assessee company u/s.147 of the Act. Notice u/s.148 of the Act, dated 14.03.2018 was issued by the AO to the assessee company. The A.O thereafter framed the reassessment vide his order

VIKRANT ROPES PRIVATE LIMITED,BHILAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), BHILAI

In the result Grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.56/Rpr/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vikrant Ropes Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer- 27, Civic Centre, Bhilai. Vs 1(1), Bhilai. Pan : Aaacv 8071 B Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Prakash Bakliwal(Adv.) & Shri Sangeet Bakliwal – Ca Revenue By Shri Piyush Tripathi – Dr Date Of Hearing 31/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12/06/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-Ii, Raipur Dated 20/01/2020 Emanating From The Order U/S 143(1) Dated 12/01/2017 For Ay 2016-17 Passed By The Asst.Director Of Income Tax(Cpc). The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals: “(1) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned C.I.T.(Appeal)-Ii- Raipur Has Dismissed The Appeal Without Giving Reasonable & Proper Opportunity To The Assessee / Appellant. The Same Order Is Quite Unjustified & Bad, Both In Law & Facts. Vikrant Ropes Pvt. Ltd., [A]

Depreciation Loss of Rs.2200884/- of A.Y. 2015-16 should be set off / carried forward in the subsequent years. (7) That

M.J. STEELS PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 28/Rpr/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016

carried forward of unabsorbed depreciation of ₹50,49,804/-. The case of the appellant company was selected for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment u/s 143(3) was completed with an addition of ₹1,08,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act, as unexplained cash credit. ITAT-Raipur Page 2 of 11 AY – 2015-2016 4.2 Concurring with the findings

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), RAIPUR vs. HI-TECH ABRASIVE PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.142/Rpr/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-2015) Acit, Circle-2(1), Raipur Vs Hi-Tech Abrasive Pvt. Ltd. 740, Sector-B, Urla Industrial Area, Raipur Pan No. :Aaach 5950 M & Cross Objection No.14/Rpr/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.142/Rpr/2018) (Assessment Year: 2014-2015) Hi-Tech Abrasive Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Raipur 740, Sector-B, Urla Industrial Area, Raipur Pan No. :Aaach 5950 M (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 : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/07/2023

carried forward to the next year. In absence of any capital gain the & CO No.14/RPR/18 assessee tried to set off the same against the business loss which is not allowable under the Act and thereby claimed higher business loss to the extent of a capital loss incurred by the assessee in the previous year under consideration. Therefore, the claim

AVINASH INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. DY. COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.31/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Avinash Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. (Private Limited Company) Avinash House, Maruti Business Park, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001. Pan : Aabcj32884H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year. We, thus, on the basis of our aforesaid observations are of the considered view that as the respective course of actions available to the aforementioned authorities i.e. the Pr. CIT/CIT on the one hand and the A.O on the other hand, gets triggered subject to satisfaction

STEEL ABRASIVE INDUSTRIES LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAIPUR, 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.96/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Steel Abrasive Industries Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income 301, Shyam Square Second Floor, Tax, Circle-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) Pandri, Raipur, Raipur-H.O, Raipur-492 001 Pan: Aagcs7905P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. 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. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Dated 17.01.2023 Which In Turn Arises From The Order By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 263 Dated 30.09.2016 For A.Y.2011-12. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. Ld. Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs.1,13,20,940/- Made By Ao, On Account Of Alleged Suppression Of Production Of 467.32Mt. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Action Of Ao In Rejecting Rectification Application Filed By The Appellant. 2. The Impugned Addition Made By The Ld. A.O. Is Bad In Law, Illegal, Unjustified, Contrary To Facts & Law & Based Upon Recording Of Incorrect Facts & Finding, In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice & The Same Should Have Been Quashed By The Ld. Cit (Appeals). 3. The Appellant Reserves The Right To Amend, Modify Or Add Any Of The Ground/S Of Appeal.”

carried the matter in appeal before us. 6. The Ld. AR has raised the issue that the CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,13,20,940/- made by the A.O on account of alleged suppression of production of 467.32 MT, therefore, the order of the A.O is bad in law, illegal and unjustified contrary

PANCHSHEEL SOLVENT PVT. LTD., RAJANANDGAON,RAJANANDGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeal is allowed, partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 110/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2016-17)

loss account of the relevant period showing an expenditure on account of investment for purchase of new asset, for which there was no bills or 9 Panchsheel Solvent Pvt. Ltd., Rajnandgaon vs ACIT, Central Circle-2, Raipur vouchers furnished during the assessment proceedings. In response to aforesaid queries, a reply was furnished by the assessee that the assessee had invested

M/S M/S SUNITA FINLEASE LIMITED,RAIPUR,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1),RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG)

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 07/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Sunita Finlease Limited 2/509, Choubey Colony, Opp. Rajkumar College, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aadcs2759J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prafulla Pendse, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

depreciation of Vehicles of Rs. 30,000/- Rs.7,59,509/- 4 M/s. Sunita Finlease Limited Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1) After making the aforesaid disallowances, the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) dated 17.02.2016 assessed the gross income of the assessee at Rs.2,41,22,793/-, which after set-off against the brought forward losses was reduced

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

depreciation for alleged personal use. 6. The above grounds are independent and without prejudice to one and another. 7. The appellant craves leave to urge, add, amend, alter, enlarge, modify, substitute, delete or withdraw any of the ground or ground and to adduce fresh evidence at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee

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

depreciation for alleged personal use. 6. The above grounds are independent and without prejudice to one and another. 7. The appellant craves leave to urge, add, amend, alter, enlarge, modify, substitute, delete or withdraw any of the ground or ground and to adduce fresh evidence at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee

KAMLESH KUMAR KESHARWANI,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.122, 123 & 124/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kamlesh Kumar Kesharwani 112, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aewpk6876Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.135, 136 & 138/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Central)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

depreciation was to be mentioned, the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Raipur had mentioned as “NA’. For the sake of clarity, the approval granted by the Jt.CIT, Range-1, Raipur is culled out as under: 19. We have given thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid contentions of the Ld. AR and find no substance in the same. On a careful perusal

KAMLESH KUMAR KESHARWANI,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.122, 123 & 124/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kamlesh Kumar Kesharwani 112, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aewpk6876Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.135, 136 & 138/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Central)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

depreciation was to be mentioned, the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Raipur had mentioned as “NA’. For the sake of clarity, the approval granted by the Jt.CIT, Range-1, Raipur is culled out as under: 19. We have given thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid contentions of the Ld. AR and find no substance in the same. On a careful perusal

DCIT(CENTRAL)-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. KALMESH KUMAR KESHARWANI, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.122, 123 & 124/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kamlesh Kumar Kesharwani 112, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aewpk6876Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.135, 136 & 138/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Central)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

depreciation was to be mentioned, the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Raipur had mentioned as “NA’. For the sake of clarity, the approval granted by the Jt.CIT, Range-1, Raipur is culled out as under: 19. We have given thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid contentions of the Ld. AR and find no substance in the same. On a careful perusal

DCIT(CENTRAL)-1,RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. KALMESH KUMAR KESHARWANI, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.122, 123 & 124/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kamlesh Kumar Kesharwani 112, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aewpk6876Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.135, 136 & 138/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Central)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

depreciation was to be mentioned, the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Raipur had mentioned as “NA’. For the sake of clarity, the approval granted by the Jt.CIT, Range-1, Raipur is culled out as under: 19. We have given thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid contentions of the Ld. AR and find no substance in the same. On a careful perusal

DCIT(CENTRAL)-1, RAIPUR vs. KALMESH KUMAR KESHARWANI, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.122, 123 & 124/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kamlesh Kumar Kesharwani 112, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aewpk6876Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.135, 136 & 138/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Central)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

depreciation was to be mentioned, the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Raipur had mentioned as “NA’. For the sake of clarity, the approval granted by the Jt.CIT, Range-1, Raipur is culled out as under: 19. We have given thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid contentions of the Ld. AR and find no substance in the same. On a careful perusal

KAMLESH KUMAR KESHARWANI,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.122, 123 & 124/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kamlesh Kumar Kesharwani 112, Janta Colony, Gudhiyari, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aewpk6876Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.135, 136 & 138/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Central)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

depreciation was to be mentioned, the Jt. CIT, Range-1, Raipur had mentioned as “NA’. For the sake of clarity, the approval granted by the Jt.CIT, Range-1, Raipur is culled out as under: 19. We have given thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid contentions of the Ld. AR and find no substance in the same. On a careful perusal

RAHUL BAJPAI,IDGAH CHOWK vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), SHRI RAM PLAZA

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.348/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rahul Bajpai Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh-495 001 Pan: Aexpb4410L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereinafter in the section 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year) Provided that where an assessment under sub section 3 of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action should be taken after

PRADEEP KUMAR AGRAWAL, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 158, 159 & 160/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18)

loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year. In the appellant case there was information that the appellant's bank accounts were mainly credited through RTGS and subsequently followed by cash withdrawals, and Pradeep Kumar Agrawal vs ITO, Ward- Dhamtari thus, made high value transaction and accordingly, as per provision of the Income