BUNDELAS SECURITAS AND CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 59 & 60/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Bundelas Securities & Consultants Pvt. Ltd. L-38, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 223 Pan : Aaccb6831H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of "the Act" but paid to the (respective funds after the due dates as specified by rules of relevant funds are correctly held as deemed income and, therefore , the disallowance is hereby confirmed as the said late payments are \ not covered under 43B of the Act. Accordingly, these grounds of appeal

BUNDELAS SECURITAS AND CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 59 & 60/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Bundelas Securities & Consultants Pvt. Ltd. L-38, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 223 Pan : Aaccb6831H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of "the Act" but paid to the (respective funds after the due dates as specified by rules of relevant funds are correctly held as deemed income and, therefore , the disallowance is hereby confirmed as the said late payments are \ not covered under 43B of the Act. Accordingly, these grounds of appeal

SUN AND SUN INFRAMETRIC PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.21/Rpr/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16)

disallowed in terms of Section 69C of the Act; (ii) Advance against sale of land of Rs.16 crores was received, but no sale deed was furnished by the assessee; The advance received has not been examined under S. 68 of the Act (iii) The assessee issued 550400 equity shares @ 170 per shares (160 premium and 10 face value

CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.81/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Ltd. Executive Director (Fin.), Csptcl, Second Floor, Sldc Building, Cseb Office Campus, Danginiya Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5773E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

56,831 Accordingly, on the basis of his aforesaid deliberations the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) dated 28.03.2014 scaled down the loss of the assessee company to an amount of Rs.(-)2,25,58,748/-. 7. Aggrieved the assessee assailed the order passed by the A.O u/s.143(3) dated 28.03.2014 before the CIT(Appeals), but without any success

CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER TRANSMISSION COMPANY LTD,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.81/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Ltd. Executive Director (Fin.), Csptcl, Second Floor, Sldc Building, Cseb Office Campus, Danginiya Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc5773E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

56,831 Accordingly, on the basis of his aforesaid deliberations the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) dated 28.03.2014 scaled down the loss of the assessee company to an amount of Rs.(-)2,25,58,748/-. 7. Aggrieved the assessee assailed the order passed by the A.O u/s.143(3) dated 28.03.2014 before the CIT(Appeals), but without any success

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 23(1) of the Act, therefore, we herein direct the A.O to determine the same strictly as per the mandate of law. Accordingly, the 49 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range, Korba ITA Nos. 93 & 94 /RPR/2017 matter is restored to the file of the A.O for giving effect to our aforesaid observations

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 23(1) of the Act, therefore, we herein direct the A.O to determine the same strictly as per the mandate of law. Accordingly, the 49 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range, Korba ITA Nos. 93 & 94 /RPR/2017 matter is restored to the file of the A.O for giving effect to our aforesaid observations

RAJESH AGRAWAL,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1(1), RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.249/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Rajesh Agrawal C/O. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel Traders, 15/343, Main Road, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001. Pan : Acppa2905F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

56,000/-u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act on account of interest paid on unsecured loans taken from Shri Brijesh Agarwal and Shri Kamal Agarwal. Aggrieved by the assessment order, appellant is in first appeal. 5.2 The AO has noted that the nephew of the appellant, Sh. Brijesh Agarwal was a creditor in the appellant's books of account

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Gramin Seva Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Vs. Income Tax Officer 1(3), Vill. Mohda Tilda, Aaykar Bhavan, Raipur, Civil Lines, Raipur (Cg). Raipur, Pan: Aaaag9755H Raipur (Cg).

disallowance of deduction under Section 80P in respect of interest of 6 Rs.26,41,215/- and dividend of Rs. 1,40,839/- on investments . It contends that income computed by the AO is totally wrong and on wrong interpretation of the provisions of the Act. Its contentions are in short, that the interest income is out of the investments made

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. The disallowance made by AO and confirmed by Learned

SHREE SITA PULSES PVT. LTD., DURG,DURG vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 217/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shree Sita Pulses Private Limited Sita Group, Behind District Court, Millpara, Durg (C.G.) Pan : Aascs8895E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.)

disallowance of Rs. 38,31,080 under section 56(2)(viib) of the Act. 5.3.(ii). The appellant submitted that

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR vs. SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD SINGHANIA, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.228/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Jagdish Prasad Singhania, 14, Singhania Sadan Main Road, Bazarpara, Ward-Tilda, Neora, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Ajkps0565M ……""यथ" / Respondent

disallowed transportation/hiring charges of Rs.2,08,270/- (supra) booked by the assessee against the names of two transporters, viz. Shri Manoj Kumar Singhania and Smt. Reema Singhania, but had not drawn any adverse inferences in respect of balance amount of transportation/hiring charges of Rs.1,22,95,088/- [ Rs.1,25,03,358/- (-) Rs.2,08,270/-]. On the basis of the aforesaid

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

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

section 68 of the IT Act. Thus we do not perceive any reason to interfere with the observation of the Ld CIT(A) qua the impugned 18 allegation of the revenue and thus upheld the order of the CIT and reject this ground of revenue. 20. Apropos, the second issue with respect to disallowance

DY. C.I.T. 1(2), RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S HIRA FERRO ALLOYS LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed for assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 shall not be deemed to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purposes of the business or profession. The CIT(A) has held that there was no such embargo for the preceding years. In view of above, the CIT(A) held that the disallowance cannot be sustained. In the instant case

DY. C.I.T. 1(2), RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S HIRA FERRO ALLOYS LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed for assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 shall not be deemed to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purposes of the business or profession. The CIT(A) has held that there was no such embargo for the preceding years. In view of above, the CIT(A) held that the disallowance cannot be sustained. In the instant case

DY. C.I.T. 1(2), RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S HIRA FERRO ALLOYS LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed for assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013 shall not be deemed to be an expenditure incurred by the assessee for the purposes of the business or profession. The CIT(A) has held that there was no such embargo for the preceding years. In view of above, the CIT(A) held that the disallowance cannot be sustained. In the instant case

DY.C.I.T. 1, BHILAI(CG) vs. SHRI SANDEEP SURENDRAN NAIR, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

Section 40(a) (ia) of the Act and its conclusion that the said proviso is declaratory and curative and has retrospective effect from 1st April 2005, merits acceptance. 15. In that view of the matter, the Court is unable to find any legal infirmity in the impugned order of the ITAT in adopting the ratio of the decision

DY.C.I.T. 1 vs. SHRI SANDEEP SURENDRAN NAIR, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

Section 40(a) (ia) of the Act and its conclusion that the said proviso is declaratory and curative and has retrospective effect from 1st April 2005, merits acceptance. 15. In that view of the matter, the Court is unable to find any legal infirmity in the impugned order of the ITAT in adopting the ratio of the decision