THE CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER GENERATION COMPANY LIMITED, RAIPUR,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(2),RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG)

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.16/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. O/O. Executive Director-Finance Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.24/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

31. Section 43B falls in Part-V of the IT Act. What is apparent is that the scheme of the Act is such that Sections 28 to 38 deal with different kinds of deductions, whereas Sections 40 to 43B spell out special provisions, laying out the mechanism for assessments and expressly prescribing conditions for disallowances. In terms of this scheme

CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER GENERATION CO. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.16/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. O/O. Executive Director-Finance Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.24/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Ltd. Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5772F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

31. Section 43B falls in Part-V of the IT Act. What is apparent is that the scheme of the Act is such that Sections 28 to 38 deal with different kinds of deductions, whereas Sections 40 to 43B spell out special provisions, laying out the mechanism for assessments and expressly prescribing conditions for disallowances. In terms of this scheme

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), RAIPUR vs. MAHARSHI MAHESH YOGI VEDIC VISHWAVIDYALAYA, JABALPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Years: 2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vs Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) & Cross Objection Nos.09 To 12/Rpr/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019) (Assessment Year :2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vs Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Arun Grover & Asheesh Ternain, Cas नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

disallowance made by the AO shall be restored. 9. To rebut the contention of the department, the ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to the chronology of the events took placed during the proceedings in the present case. Chronology demonstrating that benefit of amended provisions of Section 12A(2) w.e.f.01.10.2014 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is available

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), RAIPUR vs. MAHARSHI MAHESH YOGI VEDIC VISHWAVIDYALAYA, JABALPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Years: 2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vs Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) & Cross Objection Nos.09 To 12/Rpr/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019) (Assessment Year :2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vs Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Arun Grover & Asheesh Ternain, Cas नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

disallowance made by the AO shall be restored. 9. To rebut the contention of the department, the ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to the chronology of the events took placed during the proceedings in the present case. Chronology demonstrating that benefit of amended provisions of Section 12A(2) w.e.f.01.10.2014 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is available

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), RAIPUR vs. MAHARSHI MAHESH YOGI VEDIC VISHWAVIDYALAYA, JABALPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Years: 2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vs Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) & Cross Objection Nos.09 To 12/Rpr/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019) (Assessment Year :2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vs Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Arun Grover & Asheesh Ternain, Cas नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

disallowance made by the AO shall be restored. 9. To rebut the contention of the department, the ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to the chronology of the events took placed during the proceedings in the present case. Chronology demonstrating that benefit of amended provisions of Section 12A(2) w.e.f.01.10.2014 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is available

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), RAIPUR vs. MAHARSHI MAHESH YOGI VEDIC VISHWAVIDYALAYA, JABALPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Years: 2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vs Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) & Cross Objection Nos.09 To 12/Rpr/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.139 To 142/Rpr/2019) (Assessment Year :2009-2010 To 2012-2013) Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vs Acit (Exemption), Raipur Vishwavidyalaya, University Building, Lamti, Vijay Nagar, Jabalpur(M.P.) Pan No. :Aaajm 1070 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Arun Grover & Asheesh Ternain, Cas नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

disallowance made by the AO shall be restored. 9. To rebut the contention of the department, the ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to the chronology of the events took placed during the proceedings in the present case. Chronology demonstrating that benefit of amended provisions of Section 12A(2) w.e.f.01.10.2014 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is available

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

31. Section 43B falls in Part-V of the IT Act. What is apparent is that the scheme of the Act is such that Sections 28 to 38 deal with different kinds of deductions, whereas Sections 40 to 43B spell out special provisions, laying out the mechanism for assessments and expressly prescribing conditions for disallowances. In terms of this scheme

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. S.P. BUILDCON PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 35 & 38/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V S.P. Buildcon Private Limited Circle-1(1), S Ff-06, Shyam Plaza, Pandri Bus Stand, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Raipur Pan: Aajcs0653H (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Amit M. Jain, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05-09-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2023

2. It is a company whose principal business is other than that of- a. Banking or granting loan or advance or, b. trading in shares or banking or granting loan or advance, 3. the business of the company consists (wholly or partly) of the purchases and sale of shares of other companies. If the above conditions are satisfied, such company

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. S.P. BUILDCON PVT. LTD., RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 35 & 38/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V S.P. Buildcon Private Limited Circle-1(1), S Ff-06, Shyam Plaza, Pandri Bus Stand, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Raipur Pan: Aajcs0653H (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Amit M. Jain, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05-09-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2023

2. It is a company whose principal business is other than that of- a. Banking or granting loan or advance or, b. trading in shares or banking or granting loan or advance, 3. the business of the company consists (wholly or partly) of the purchases and sale of shares of other companies. If the above conditions are satisfied, such company

BHUNESHWAR PRASAD SAHU, BALODA BAZAR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- BHATAPARA, BHATAPARA

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.109/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Bhuneshwar Prasad Sahu Main Road, Raseda, Baloda Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Bayps7721N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Khapradih, Bhatapara ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 139(1). 2. That other ground shall be pressed at the time of hearing.” 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee had e-filed his return of income for A.Y.2019-20 on 31.10.2019, declaring an income of Rs.97,15,020/-. The assessee's income thereafter was processed by the CPC, Bengaluru, vide intimation issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act dated

THE GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,BALODA BAZAR(C.G0 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), RAIPUR (CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee

THE GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,RAIPUR (CG) vs. TJE INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), RAIPUR (CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee

THE SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITIT MARYADIT,JOSHILAMATI,RAJNANDGAON vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER -1,, RAJNANDGAON

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee

THE GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), RAIPUR (CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee

M/S GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,DHAMTARI(C.G) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI(C.G)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee

THE SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITIT MARYADIT,SOMNI,RAJNANDGAON vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-2, RAJNANDGAON

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee

THE GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,RAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), RAIPUR (CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee

THE GRAMIN SEVA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,DHAMTARI(C.G) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI(C.G)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction as regards the balance amount of profit. Assailing the restriction of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(iii) to 35% of its income of Rs. 16,21,218/-, it is the claim of the ld. A.R before us that the same is highly exorbitant, for the reason, that the assessee