AARTI SPONGE AND POWER LTD.,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, -1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.70/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. Aarti Sponge & Power Ltd. Acit -1 (1) Aarti House, Ashoka Ratna Shankar Raipur Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492 001

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 issued by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – 2(1), Raipur dated 04.11.2015. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. Learnd CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.19,10,513/- made by AO, invoking sec 14A

HIRA INFRA-TEK LTD., RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.77/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Hira Infra-Tek Limited Acit Hira Arcade Near New Bus Stand, Circle – 1(1) Pandri, Raipur Raipur

3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 27.03.2015. :: 2 :: 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.53,63,056/- made by AO invoking Section 14A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1), RAIPUR vs. MESERS VANDANA ISPAT LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

disallowance of Rs. 19,40,967/- made by the AO u/s 14A of the Act r.w.r. 8D of the I.T.Rules?” 19. “Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in not considering the extent provisions of section 14A(3

MANILAL DAYALJI & CO,DHAMTARI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE 2(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.290/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Manilal Dayalji & Co. Gola Bidi Works, Sadar Bazar, Dhamtari (C.G.) Pin : 493773 Pan : Aagfm4587N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Dcit-2(1), Central Revenue Building, Civil Lane, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B. Doshi, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.03.2022

section 14A read with Rule 8D – Rs.4,70,298/- (ii) Disallowance out of management and development expenses for investments – Rs.1,73,774/-. (iii) Adhoc disallowance out of telephone and travelling expenses of Rs.1 lakh. 2.2. Aggrieved, the assessee assailed the assessment order before the CIT(A), but without any success. 3

M/S M/S NAV BHARAT PRESS,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3(1), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.06/Rpr/2017 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.162/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2015-2016) M/S Nava Bharat Press, Vs Acit, Cirlce-3(1), Raipur Press Complex, G.E.Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan No. : Aadfn 0350 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

disallowance under section 14A of any amount was not permissible. The departmental SLP filed against such judgment has been rejected on 8th Feb, 2019 by Hon. Apex Court as reported as Principle CIT Vs. Oil Industry Development Board [2019] 103 Taxmann.com 326 (SC)/ [2019] 262 Taxmann.com 102 (SC). 3

SHRI GOPAL PRASAD AGRAWAL,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

Section 14A of the Act, r.w.R.8D of the IT Rules, 1962 regarding disallowance of interest of Rs.5,21,098/- and half percent of the aforesaid investment towards administrative expenses amounting to Rs.51,508/- in aggregating the total disallowance was Rs.5,72,606/-. 3

M/S GOEL ZENITH AGRO (P) LTD,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(2), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

14A r.w.r. 8D. The 3 disallowance made by the A.O. and confirmed by CIT(A) is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for. 2. The assesse reserves the rights to add, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. During the course of assessment proceedings on perusing the Balance sheet the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-1, RAIPUR vs. M/S. CHHATTISGARH STEEL & POWER LIMITED, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 96/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

Disallowance as per 87,41,411/- Section 14A r.w.r.8D 89,41,411/- Last year’s addition 2,00,000/- Total loss to be carry forwarded Rs.(-)3

MESERS METEX ENGINEERS,BHILAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BHILAI

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

3. PCIT vs. Oil Industries No exempt income then no Hon’ble Development Board disallowance u/s 14A. Supreme Court of (2019) 262 Taxman 103 India 4. CIT vs. Chettinad No exempt income then no Hon’ble Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) disallowance u/s 14A. Supreme Court of 257 Taxman 2 India 5. CIT vs. Essar No exempt income then

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BHILAI vs. MESERS METEX ENGINEERS, BHILAI

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

3. PCIT vs. Oil Industries No exempt income then no Hon’ble Development Board disallowance u/s 14A. Supreme Court of (2019) 262 Taxman 103 India 4. CIT vs. Chettinad No exempt income then no Hon’ble Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) disallowance u/s 14A. Supreme Court of 257 Taxman 2 India 5. CIT vs. Essar No exempt income then

M/S AVINASH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.156/Rpr/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ष / / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Avinash Developers Pvt. Vs The Deputy/Assistant Ltd. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Avinash House, Maruti Circle-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) Business Park, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan No. : Aadca4060E

disallowance made by the A.O should be restricted to that amount only i.e. 3,82,401/-. 5.1 With respect to the amendment in Section 14A

ABIS EXPORT INDIA PVT. LTD.,RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

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. 194/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Abis Export India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ib, Corporate House, Indamara, Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhilai Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aacca2881J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bikram Jain, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/10/2023 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 (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) Dated 28.03.2023 For A.Y.2018-19. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax—Raipur-1 Has Erred In Holding The Assessment Order Passed By The National E-Assessment Centre (Neac) On 01.03.2021 As Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue As The Order Was Passed Without Making Any Enquiry On The Issues Of Applicability Of Section 14A Of The I. T. Act, 1961. The Assessment Order Passed By The Neac Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Therefore The Order U/S 263 Passed By The Ld. Cit Is Unjustified, Unwarranted & Uncalled. 2. The Assessee Reserves The Right To Add, Amend Or Alter Any Grounds Of Appeal At Any Time Of Hearing.”

3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act dated 01.03.2021 is erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of revenue in light of section 263 of the Act. In respect to the notice u/s.263 of the Act issued by the Ld. Pr. CIT, the assessee submitted reply asserting that provisions of Section 14A

M/S SHREE NAKODA INDUSTRIES LTD,RAIPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(2), RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

14A r.w.r. 8D. The 3 disallowance made by the A.O. is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for. 2. The assesse reserves the rights to add, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. During the course of assessment proceedings on perusing the Balance sheet the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had invested Rs.4.41 crores

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. SHRI BAJRANG POWER AND ISPAT LTD., RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 201/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Bajrang Power & Ispat Limited, 00, Vill. Borjhara, Urla Guma Road, Raipur-493221. Pan : Aaccb2944D ……""यथ" / Respondent

14A r.w.r.8D Rs.35,18,577/- 3. Disallowance of the assessee’s claim Rs.2,65,16,038/- for deduction in respect of income from generation of power u/s.80IA of the Act (out of eligible claim of deduction of Rs.33,47,08,041/-) 4. Aggrieved with the order passed by the A.O. u/s.143(3) of the Act, dated 11.08.2014, the assessee carried

SHRI SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR AGRAWAL, KORBA,KORBA(CG) vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE KORBA, KORBA(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assesee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 93 & 94/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Prop. Of M/S. Shrikishan & Co., T.P Nagar, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Acgpa4350B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

Section 14A(2) and (3) read with Rule 8D of the Rules or a best judgment determination, as earlier prevailing, would become applicable.” Also, a similar view haa been taken by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). In the case before us it is a matter

SHRI SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR AGRAWAL, KORBA,KORBA(CG) vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,RANGE KORBA, KORBA(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assesee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 93 & 94/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Prop. Of M/S. Shrikishan & Co., T.P Nagar, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Acgpa4350B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

Section 14A(2) and (3) read with Rule 8D of the Rules or a best judgment determination, as earlier prevailing, would become applicable.” Also, a similar view haa been taken by the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). In the case before us it is a matter

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL)-I, RAIPUR vs. MESERS CHHATTISGARH STEEL & POWER LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.65,59,256/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act r.w.r 8D of the Income Tax Rules. 3

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I, RAIPUR vs. MESERS CHHATTISGARH STEEL & POWER LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.65,59,256/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act r.w.r 8D of the Income Tax Rules. 3

DY. C.I.T.1(2), RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S GODAWARI POWER & ISPAT LTD.,, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit- 1(2), Godawari Power & Ispat Ltd., Raipur (Cg). Plot No.482/2, Industrial Growth Vs. Centre, Phase- 1, Siltara, Raipur (Cg).

3. Gross Total Income 53,64,42,803 Less: Set-off of unabsorbed depreciation R.R. 2,53,85,466 Ispat- A.Y. 2010-11 as per the revised return Set-off of unabsorbed depreciation Iron Ore 20,50,644 2,74,36,110 crushing Div – A.Y. 2009-10 as per the revised return Less: Deduction u/s 80IA 0 0 4. Total