ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -1, BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -1, BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR vs. MESERS SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

disallowing the contractual expenses payments made to transporters for transportation coal etc. amounting to Rs.25,40,64,757/- in spite of the fact on record that the submission made by the assessee was not fully convicting and acceptable as well as the payments made are seems to be for non-business purposes. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A)’s order

M/S SHREE SHYAM SPONGE & POWER PVT LTD,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHOPAL

In the result the grounds of the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, hereinafter called as “ld. PCIT” Bhopal, dated 08.02.2016 for the A.Y. 2008-09. The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAGDALPUR vs. SHRI RAJA VIKRAM, BASTAR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 347/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer Dist. Bastar (C.G) .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Shri Raja Vikram P/O. M/S. Vikas Associate ( Engineers), Jeypore Road, Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, Dist. Bastar (C.G) Pan : Acopr6013N ……प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent

254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appea1/cross- objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised earlier

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. M/S SUNIL SPONGE PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.73/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. H. No.11, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aahcs7999A ……""यथ" / Respondent

disallowance for asst. yrs 1991-92 and 1992-93 respectively. (iii) The assessee carried the matter further by filing an appeal before the Tribunal. Initially the Tribunal by its common order dated 3rd April, 1997 dismissed the assessee's appeals for the asst. yrs. 1991- 92 and 1992-93. Thereafter the assessee filed an application under section 254

VISHWANATH GUPTA, MANENDRAGARH,MANENDRAGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BILASPUR, BILASPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am

disallowance of discount of Rs.1,49,845/- and addition of Rs.9,38,000/- under the head “commission income”. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution. 2 Vishwanath Gupta, Manendragarh vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur 4. The appeal filed before us is delayed by 47 days. The reason

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited are directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), hereinafter called as “ld. M/s. Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 CIT(A)” Bilaspur, dated

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited are directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), hereinafter called as “ld. M/s. Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 CIT(A)” Bilaspur, dated

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited are directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), hereinafter called as “ld. M/s. Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 CIT(A)” Bilaspur, dated

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited are directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), hereinafter called as “ld. M/s. Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 CIT(A)” Bilaspur, dated

MESERS GOYAL INFRAVENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited are directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), hereinafter called as “ld. M/s. Goyal Energy & Steel Pvt. Ltd.& another ITA Nos.240-243 & 246/RPR/2019 CIT(A)” Bilaspur, dated

C.G. BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee company is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.300/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 C.G Buildcon Private Limited B-1, 3Rd Floor, C.G. Elite, Opp. Mandi Gate, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandri (C.G.)-492 004 Pan: Aaccc5355P

section (2) of Sec. 254 of the Act; therefore, the order to the said limited extent, i.e, for adjudicating the aforesaid “Ground of appeal no. 6” is recalled. The registry is directed to fix the appeal for 25 C.G Buildcon Private Limited Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur the aforesaid limited purpose on 24/01/2025 after putting both the parties