BEC PROJECTS LTD., ,BHILAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 06/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Bec Projects Limited 4/5, Industrial Estate, Bhilai (C.G.)-490 020 Pan : Aaacb9275H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

92,816/- and ESIC : Rs.1,20,216/-] was disallowed by him u/s.2(24)(x) of the Act. The A.O after, inter alia, disallowing the assessee’s claim for deduction, assessed income of the assessee company at Rs.2,21,80,427/-. 4. Aggrieved the assessee assailed the disallowance of its claim for deduction of delayed deposit of employee’s share

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1(1), RAIPUR vs. BHARAT AGRO INDUSTRIES, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed as above

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

disallowed for violation of section 40A(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 and added back to the total income of the assessee.” 3.1. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who allowed the appeal not only based on evidences produced before him but also on the preponderance of probability of enquiries outcome

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

SHRI SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR PATEL,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), RAIPUR (CG)

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G D Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.336/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-11 Shri Deepak Kumar Patel, Hind Pipe Industries, New Timber Market, Fafadih, Raipur (C.G.)-492 009 Pan : Akgpp0868F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

92,79,712 Job work expenses 51,36,860 76,48,625 36,95,500 % to gross sales 7.38 7.24 4.66 Although, the CIT(Appeals) observed that the assessee neither in the course of the assessment proceeding nor before him had placed on record any supporting documentary evidence to substantiate his claim of having incurred job work expenses, but considering

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

SHUBH KARAN MAHNOT, AMBIKAPUR,AMBIKAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 155/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shubh Karan Mahnot Prop. M/S. Bikaner Agencies, Tulshi Chowk, Near Primary School, Gangapur, Ambikapur (C.G.)-497 001 Pan : Aalhs2528G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 43A in respect of godown charges and electricity charges paid by way of cash exceeding of Rs.10,000/-. In the facts and circumstances the additions of Rs.3,63,642/- and Rs.3,84,000/- on account of electricity charges and godown rent. are sustained. The grounds of appeal taken by the appellant are partly allowed. In the result, Appeal

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 801A, restricted Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-2011& 2011-12 transfer rate to the market value of the power supplied to inter division at Rs.2.80 per unit in place of Rs.2.97 per unit claimed by the assessee. This has resulted into disallowance of claim u/s 801A by Rs.2,03,92

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 801A, restricted Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-2011& 2011-12 transfer rate to the market value of the power supplied to inter division at Rs.2.80 per unit in place of Rs.2.97 per unit claimed by the assessee. This has resulted into disallowance of claim u/s 801A by Rs.2,03,92

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 801A, restricted Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-2011& 2011-12 transfer rate to the market value of the power supplied to inter division at Rs.2.80 per unit in place of Rs.2.97 per unit claimed by the assessee. This has resulted into disallowance of claim u/s 801A by Rs.2,03,92

SUBRAMANIAM SWAMINATHAN IYER, BHILAI,DURG vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHILAI, DURG

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.71/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Subramaniam Swaminathan Iyer 12-A/7, Nehru Nagar, Bhilai (C.G.)-490 020 Pan: Anwps2381P

Section 14A read with Rule 8D and disallowed Rs.55,06,957/-. The AO worked out the disallowance as under: Particulars Amount Disallowance u/r.8D(20(ii) on account of 50,65,957/- interest Disallowance of expenditure u/r.8D(2)(iii) 4,41,000/- 55,06,957/- 8.2. The appellant has submitted that excessive disallowance has been worked

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, KORBA, KORBA vs. M/S BUDHIA AUTO, MAIN ROAD

Accordingly, ground no. 1 of the appeal of revenue stands dismissed and the disallowance made by Ld

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 158/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2012-13)

Section 43B such amount is liable to be disallowed. Accordingly, an amount of Rs. 4,00,18,841/- (7,63,772+3,92

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR vs. SHANTA TECHNO PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 155/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

Section 69C of the Act, treating the alleged disputed purchase as bogus transactions recorded in the books of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved with the aforesaid disallowance by the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), wherein the plea of the assessee, placing reliance on various decisions, was deliberated upon, and the appeal of the assessee

M/S. AJAY CONSTRUCTION,KORBA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, KORBA(CG)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 259/Bil/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Ajay Construction, Plot No. 155, T.P. Nagar, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G) Pan : Aanfa0129P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba (Cg) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Y. K. Mishra Revenue By : Shri G. N. Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08.06.2022

section as whole in strict construction leads to a result not intended to be sub served by the object of the legislation, and if another construction is possible apart from the literal in construction, the that construction should be preferred. 5.1 The ld. AR of the assessee also drawn our attention to an application filed under rule 29 which reads

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

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2 & 3/Rpr/2023 Co Nos. 19 & 20/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

92,885/- deserves to be deleted. As regard to the addition made of Rs.49,01,692/- being the disallowance u/s 36(1)(iv) of the Act and penalty levied, in the light of the recent Supreme Court Judgement in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd., Vs. CIT-1 vide Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022, the addition

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

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 2 & 3/Rpr/2023 Co Nos. 19 & 20/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

92,885/- deserves to be deleted. As regard to the addition made of Rs.49,01,692/- being the disallowance u/s 36(1)(iv) of the Act and penalty levied, in the light of the recent Supreme Court Judgement in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd., Vs. CIT-1 vide Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022, the addition

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.”

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 80D cannot be triggered. We find force in this contention also, in view of various judgments relied upon by the Ld. AR, listed as under: -  South India Bank Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [(2021) 112 CCH 0005 ISCC] -Refer page no 85-87 of PB  CIT vs. Reliance Industries Limited

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-3(1),RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S KARSHAN BHAI & BROTHERS, RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is Partly Allowed for Statistical Purpose

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.31/Rpr/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S.Karshan Bhai & Income-Tax-3(1), Raipur(C.G.) V Brothers, S Opp. Sbi, Bilaspur Road, Fafadih, Raipur(C.G.) Pan: Aacfk 7397 Q Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Cross Obection No.07/Rpr/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Karshan Bhai & Brothers, The Asstt. Commissioner Of Opp. Sbi, Bilaspur Road, V Income-Tax-3(1), Fafadih, Raipur(C.G.) S Raipur(C.G.) Pan: Aacfk 7397 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri R.B.Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Debashish Lahiri – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 31/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 27/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Cross Appeal By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-Raipur Dated 08.12.2016, Emanating From Order Of The Assessing Officer Dated 31.03.2015

disallowed assessee’s claim of deduction under ITA No.31/RPR/2016 & C.O.No.07/RPR/2017 M/s.Karshan Bhai & Brothers section 80IB(10) of the Act on the ground that assessee has violated conditions mentioned in section 80IB(10)(d) and (f) of the Act. The AO had deputed Inspector to verify the facts. According to the AO, certain flats are more than 1500 sq.ft

DY. C.I.T.2(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. M/S SECL, BILASPUR(CG)

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee as well as revenue are either allowed, partly allowed for statistical purposes or dismissed, in accordance with our observations herein above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.201/Bil/2012 (Ay : 2009-2010) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.401/Bil/2014 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.162/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Bil/2015 (Ay : 2011-2012) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.102/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2012-2013) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2013-2014) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Rpr/2017 (Ay : 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.169/Rpr/2018 (Ay : 2015-2016) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.33/Rpr/2019 (Ay : 2016-2017) South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Vs Jcit, Range-1, Bilaspur Seepat Road, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aadcs 2066 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Bil/2012 (Ay : 2009-2010) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.382/Bil/2014 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Bil/2015 (Ay : 2011-2012) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.98/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2012-2013) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.99/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2013-2014) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.188/Rpr/2017 (Ay : 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.171/Rpr/2018 (Ay : 2015-2016) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.54/Rpr/2019 (Ay : 2016-2017) Dcit, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur Vs South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Seepat Road, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aadcs 2066 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate, Shri Ankur Goel & Shri Ankit Agrawal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Debashish Lahiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/10/2023

Disallowance of expenditure on actuarial valuation of employee compensation; 3 Disallowance of depreciation on Apollo Hospital Building; 4 Disallowance of expenditure on account of land revenue; 5 Disallowance of prior period expenses 6 Disallowance of Land Compensation & Rehabilitation Expenses; Amortization of land rehabilitation 6E 7 Disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act; 8 Disallowance of expenditure on assets not belonging

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

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee as well as revenue are either allowed, partly allowed for statistical purposes or dismissed, in accordance with our observations herein above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.201/Bil/2012 (Ay : 2009-2010) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.401/Bil/2014 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.162/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Bil/2015 (Ay : 2011-2012) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.102/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2012-2013) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2013-2014) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Rpr/2017 (Ay : 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.169/Rpr/2018 (Ay : 2015-2016) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.33/Rpr/2019 (Ay : 2016-2017) South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Vs Jcit, Range-1, Bilaspur Seepat Road, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aadcs 2066 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.204/Bil/2012 (Ay : 2009-2010) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.382/Bil/2014 (Ay : 2010-2011) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Bil/2015 (Ay : 2011-2012) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.98/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2012-2013) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.99/Bil/2017 (Ay : 2013-2014) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.188/Rpr/2017 (Ay : 2014-2015) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.171/Rpr/2018 (Ay : 2015-2016) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.54/Rpr/2019 (Ay : 2016-2017) Dcit, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur Vs South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Seepat Road, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aadcs 2066 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ajit Korde, Advocate, Shri Ankur Goel & Shri Ankit Agrawal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Debashish Lahiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/10/2023

Disallowance of expenditure on actuarial valuation of employee compensation; 3 Disallowance of depreciation on Apollo Hospital Building; 4 Disallowance of expenditure on account of land revenue; 5 Disallowance of prior period expenses 6 Disallowance of Land Compensation & Rehabilitation Expenses; Amortization of land rehabilitation 6E 7 Disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act; 8 Disallowance of expenditure on assets not belonging