AADITYA CONSTRUCTION,KORBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-I KORBA, KORBA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as above

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No: 536/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15) Aaditya Construction, Vs Income Tax Officer- 1, Korba 56, Indira Complex, Transport Nagar, Mahanadi Extension Complex, Korba-495001, C.G. Ghantaghar, Niharika Road, Kashi Nagar, Korba-495677, C.G. Pan: Aapfa5390N (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 : 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 16/02/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

section 145(3) of the Act and applied Net Profit (‘NP’) rate of 12.50% before the claim of deduction of interest, depreciation

THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1(2),, RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S. BALAJEE STRUCTURALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

section 145(3) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 3. Whether in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.3,69,635/- made by the AO on account of depreciation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SANJAY AGRAWAL, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 82/Rpr/2018 Co No.05/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sanjay Agrawal 35-36, Millenium Plaza, G. E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aapfs0532E ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24.05.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09.06.2022

Section 145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 may kindly be held as bad in law, improper, illegal and consequential enhancement made to the total income by resorting to estimation may kindly be directed to be deleted..” As the issue involved in the departments appeal and the cross- objection filed by the assessee are inextricably interlinked or in fact interwoven

D.C.I.T. CENTRAL CRICLE,, RAIPUR vs. MAHAMAYA STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 62/Rpr/2018) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14)

145(3) of the Act. As per the legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Chhattisgarh High Court (supra.) that this power is not unfettered and it has to be used judicially by giving specific reasons which in the instant case, the Assessing Officer has not complied with. 11. In the case of ACIT-1(1), Raipur Vs. Siyaram

NAVBHARAT FUSE COMPANY LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.119/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Navbharat Fuse Company Ltd., Vs Acit-3(1), Raipur Navbharat Udyog Bhawan, Ring Road No.1, Po:Ravigram, Telibandha, Raipur Pan No. : Aaacn 7537 N (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

145(3) is arbitrary & not justified. The addition made by AO and sustained by CIT(A) is not justified. 2. Without prejudice to ground no.1, Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that depreciation should have been allowed as deduction from the income estimated by AO, in terms of mandatory Circular of CBDT. The AO erred in not allowing depreciation from

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. M/S RADHESHYAM AGRAWAL , RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 42/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Radheshyam Agarwal L-24, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aacfr8916J ……""यथ" / Respondent

depreciation allowance and deduction on account of interest and finance charges separately after estimation of income. In this context the appellant has relied upon the CBDT circular 29D(XIX-14) dated 31.08.1965. However, in view of the relief allowed to the appellant in the first and second grounds above these grounds of appeal are infructuous and hence not dealt separately

M/S G.N.CONSTRUCTION vs. I.T.O. WARD AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR (CG)

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri R.L. Negi)

145 Numerous instances have come to the notice of the Board where assessee's claim for depreciation duly shown in the return was not considered by the ITO because books of account produced were not properly maintained and it was necessary to estimate profits by invoking the proviso to s.13 of the Indian IT Act, 1922. The course generally followed

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

3. The assessee has also filed cross objection wherein the assessee has supported the addition deleted by the ld. CIT(A) of Rs.1,73,76,465/- made by the AO under the head impairment loss. However, the assessee has agitated the sustenance of addition of Rs.17,877/- made by the AO u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act representing employees’ contribution

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)

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

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)

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

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)

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

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

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 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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. ABHISHEKH STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD., RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.107/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Abhishek Steel Industries Ltd. B-8 & 9, Sector C, Urla Industrial Area, Sarona, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaeca3704G ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 14A shall be worked out even if the assessee does not have any tax free income as clarified by the CBDT as per circular no.05 of 2014 dated 11th Feb. 2014 and that the assessee had made huge investments out of interest bearing funds." 4. "The appellant reserves his right to add, amend or alter the grounds of appeals