RAHUL BAJPAI,IDGAH CHOWK vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), SHRI RAM PLAZA

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.345/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Bajpai Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh-495 001 Pan: Aexpb4410L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

Section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act which, thus, had resulted to a substantial addition in the hands of the assessee. 13 Rahul Bajpai Vs. DCIT Circle-1(1), Bilaspur 14. Apropos the observation of the A.O that as the assessee had failed to place on record supporting documentary evidence which would substantiate that the lands sold

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

56,15,450/- made by the A.O by disallowing the loss shown to have been claimed from commodity transactions being speculative loss and from business activity of the assessee. 4. Any other ground which may be adduced at the time of hearing. First, we are taking the appeal for the AY 2014-15: 2. Statement of facts culled out from

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

56,15,450/- made by the A.O by disallowing the loss shown to have been claimed from commodity transactions being speculative loss and from business activity of the assessee. 4. Any other ground which may be adduced at the time of hearing. First, we are taking the appeal for the AY 2014-15: 2. Statement of facts culled out from

NAYA RAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), RAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 174 & 63/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(S) : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Naya Raipur Development Authority Prayavas Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Naya Raipur Marg, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar(C.G.) Pin-492 002. Pan : Aaalc0225H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri S.R Rao & Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ar’S. Revenue By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09.06.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022

disallowed and taxed as per law and further (c) how the works of the assessee could be called as activity of general public utility. Before submitting clause-wise reply to this query, the assessee seeks permission to re-order sequence of the clauses and prefers to address clause (c) at the outset through detailed note enclosed. The first proviso

NAYA RAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,RAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), RAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 174 & 63/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(S) : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Naya Raipur Development Authority Prayavas Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Naya Raipur Marg, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar(C.G.) Pin-492 002. Pan : Aaalc0225H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri S.R Rao & Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ar’S. Revenue By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09.06.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022

disallowed and taxed as per law and further (c) how the works of the assessee could be called as activity of general public utility. Before submitting clause-wise reply to this query, the assessee seeks permission to re-order sequence of the clauses and prefers to address clause (c) at the outset through detailed note enclosed. The first proviso

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

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battull

disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction of the dividend income of Rs. 1,16,224/- that was earned on the shares of Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, i.e, a co-operative Bank u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that both the lower authorities had failed to appreciate the facts of the case