HITESH GOLCHHA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed, in terms of our observations herein above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.101, 102, 103 & 104/Rpr/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) V. Hitesh Golchha Acit, Prop. Of Mouli Investment, Central Circle-1 Jeevan Ganga, Near Dani Bada, Raipur Budha Para, Raipur – 492 001 Chhattisgarh [Pan: Agjpg 7698 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B. Subramanyam, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri S. K. Meena, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.11.2023

50C was raised by the Ld. AO vide notice date 20.08.2018. (Refer page No. 109 of paper book). Reply to the said notice was submitted before Ld. AO on 04.10.2018 & 26.11.2018 along with relevant documentary evidences. (Refer page no. 116 of paper book). On further discussions with respect to applicability of section 43CA during the course of hearing of assessment

HITESH GOLCHHA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed, in terms of our observations herein above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.101, 102, 103 & 104/Rpr/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) V. Hitesh Golchha Acit, Prop. Of Mouli Investment, Central Circle-1 Jeevan Ganga, Near Dani Bada, Raipur Budha Para, Raipur – 492 001 Chhattisgarh [Pan: Agjpg 7698 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B. Subramanyam, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri S. K. Meena, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.11.2023

50C was raised by the Ld. AO vide notice date 20.08.2018. (Refer page No. 109 of paper book). Reply to the said notice was submitted before Ld. AO on 04.10.2018 & 26.11.2018 along with relevant documentary evidences. (Refer page no. 116 of paper book). On further discussions with respect to applicability of section 43CA during the course of hearing of assessment

HITESH GOLCHHA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed, in terms of our observations herein above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.101, 102, 103 & 104/Rpr/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) V. Hitesh Golchha Acit, Prop. Of Mouli Investment, Central Circle-1 Jeevan Ganga, Near Dani Bada, Raipur Budha Para, Raipur – 492 001 Chhattisgarh [Pan: Agjpg 7698 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B. Subramanyam, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri S. K. Meena, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.11.2023

50C was raised by the Ld. AO vide notice date 20.08.2018. (Refer page No. 109 of paper book). Reply to the said notice was submitted before Ld. AO on 04.10.2018 & 26.11.2018 along with relevant documentary evidences. (Refer page no. 116 of paper book). On further discussions with respect to applicability of section 43CA during the course of hearing of assessment

SMT. SHAHNAJ SHEIKH,,KORBA(CG) vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- I, KORBA(CG)

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 148/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Smt. Shahnaj Sheikh Mig-Ii, 47, Nehru Nagar, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Brpps3003Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Debashis Lahiri, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :14.03.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022

Section 50C of the Act and adopting the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the property at Rs. 73.15 lac (supra), therein, vide his order passed under Sec. 143(3) r.w.s 147, dated 20.06.2014 determined the net LTCG at Rs. 2,04,279/-. 3. After culmination of the assessment proceedings the Pr. CIT called for the assessment records of the assessee

MAHESH SHRIVASTAVA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO-3(1),RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 702/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2008-09) Vs Mahesh Shrivastava, Income Tax Officer-3(1), House No. 6, Phase-Ii, Office Of The Income Tax Office, Harsh Vihar Colony, Daldalshivni Central Revenue Building Civil Road, Mowa, Raipur-492007, C.G. Lines, Raipur-492001, C.G. Pan: Bqfps6242G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Shri Veekaas S Sharma, Ca िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : 05.01.2026 सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 05.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: This Appeal For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2008-09 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.09.2025 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

House No. 6, Phase-II, Office of the Income Tax Office, Harsh Vihar Colony, Daldalshivni Central Revenue Building Civil Road, Mowa, Raipur-492007, C.G. Lines, Raipur-492001, C.G. PAN: BQFPS6242G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CA िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR राज" की ओर से / Revenue by : 05.01.2026 सुनवाई की

SYED HIFAJAT ALI,INDORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BILASPUR

Appeal are disposed of in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 527/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2016-17)

section 56(2)(vii) r.w.s 50C, valuation by DVO cannot exceed the stamp duty valuation of property and accordingly when the value of property recorded by the assessee in his books is as per the stamp duty valuation, no further increase in warranted in the same. It is prayed that addition of Rs. 2,64,21,740/- made

SMT BUDHAREEN BAI,BHATAPARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, BHATAPARA

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Budhia Reen Bai, Ito, Near Shitala Mandir, Bhatapara (Cg). Hathanipara Ward, Vs. Bhatapara (Cg) – 493118. Pan : Bxxpb0771Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vikash Sharma, Adv. Department By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 13-05-2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 14-05-2019 O R D E R Per Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am :

Section 55 of the I.T. Act. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to get exemption u/s 54F in respect of investment of Rs.35.00 lakhs made by the assessee in the construction of residential house property. Hence, it is prayed that the exemption u/s 54F may kindly be allowed. 7. The Appellant

SMT. PUSHPA JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

50C was found to be the same. It was further observed by him that 12 Sanket Jhabak & Others Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur ITA No.478 & 479/RPR/2024 ITA Nos. 233 to 237/RPR/2024 the subject land was sold by the co-owners to a corporate entity i.e. M/s. Reliance Progressive Traders Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Raman Rati Apartment, Near

SAMPAT LAL JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

50C was found to be the same. It was further observed by him that 12 Sanket Jhabak & Others Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur ITA No.478 & 479/RPR/2024 ITA Nos. 233 to 237/RPR/2024 the subject land was sold by the co-owners to a corporate entity i.e. M/s. Reliance Progressive Traders Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Raman Rati Apartment, Near

SMT. SUSHILA DEVI JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

50C was found to be the same. It was further observed by him that 12 Sanket Jhabak & Others Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur ITA No.478 & 479/RPR/2024 ITA Nos. 233 to 237/RPR/2024 the subject land was sold by the co-owners to a corporate entity i.e. M/s. Reliance Progressive Traders Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Raman Rati Apartment, Near

SMT. TILOTTAMA JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

50C was found to be the same. It was further observed by him that 12 Sanket Jhabak & Others Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur ITA No.478 & 479/RPR/2024 ITA Nos. 233 to 237/RPR/2024 the subject land was sold by the co-owners to a corporate entity i.e. M/s. Reliance Progressive Traders Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Raman Rati Apartment, Near

SANKET JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

50C was found to be the same. It was further observed by him that 12 Sanket Jhabak & Others Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur ITA No.478 & 479/RPR/2024 ITA Nos. 233 to 237/RPR/2024 the subject land was sold by the co-owners to a corporate entity i.e. M/s. Reliance Progressive Traders Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Raman Rati Apartment, Near

SANJOG JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

50C was found to be the same. It was further observed by him that 12 Sanket Jhabak & Others Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur ITA No.478 & 479/RPR/2024 ITA Nos. 233 to 237/RPR/2024 the subject land was sold by the co-owners to a corporate entity i.e. M/s. Reliance Progressive Traders Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Raman Rati Apartment, Near

SANJOG JHABAK L/H OF LATE GAUTAM CHAND JHABAK, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the captioned assessees are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

50C was found to be the same. It was further observed by him that 12 Sanket Jhabak & Others Vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur ITA No.478 & 479/RPR/2024 ITA Nos. 233 to 237/RPR/2024 the subject land was sold by the co-owners to a corporate entity i.e. M/s. Reliance Progressive Traders Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Raman Rati Apartment, Near

JAI GURUDEV INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,BILASPUR vs. PR. CIT, BILASPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No. 65/Rpr/2020 अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16) (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jai Gurudev Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Principal Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम C-11, Netaji Complex, Jarhabhata, Income-Tax, Vs. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh Bilaspur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccj 1895 R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 29.07.2021 सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing 14.10.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia - Am:

houses, flats, farmhouses. However, as per cl.19 of the aforesaid MOA the assessee was authorized to sell, improve, alter, manage, develop exchange, lease, mortgage," dispose of, etc. of the business lands, property, assets etc in whole or in part in such manner and on such terms as the Directors may think fit. Therefore, the income of the assessee received