BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

30 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi974Mumbai907Jaipur371Ahmedabad331Hyderabad224Chennai208Kolkata176Pune163Bangalore157Indore147Surat109Rajkot106Chandigarh95Amritsar76Visakhapatnam55Cochin53Nagpur46Agra38Lucknow37Allahabad36Calcutta35Raipur30Jabalpur30Karnataka24Guwahati22Cuttack20Patna19Jodhpur15Kerala14Varanasi9Dehradun4Ranchi2Telangana2Rajasthan1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)30Section 143(3)26Addition to Income23Section 26317Section 69A16Section 14716Cash Deposit15Penalty14Section 6912Section 68

VIKAS SHARMA, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), BHILAI, DURG

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

ITA 256/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 256/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Vikas Sharma Quarter No.6-A, Ruabandha Sector, Bhilai, Dist. Durg (C.G.)-490 006 Pan : Ddcps1720P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(2), Bhilai, Durg (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal &For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

cash deposit in his bank account: Rs.10,20,000/-; and (ii) undisclosed profit on share trading: Rs.4,57,027/-, income of the assessee was determined at Rs.18,34,867/-. The A.O. at the time of culminating the assessment proceedings, initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 14810
TDS5

SHRI SHRI MAHESH KUMAR DUHLANI,KORBA(CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE , KORBA, KORBA(CG)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 92/BIL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 92/Bil/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Mahesh Kumar Duhlani Main Road, P. O. Katoghora, Distt. Korba (C.G) Pan : Aejpd4102K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle Mahanadi Complex, Niharika Road, Korba (Cg) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri G. S. Agrawal Revenue By : Shri G. N. Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09.06.2022

For Appellant: Shri G. S. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri G. N. Singh
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244Section 68

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are being initiated separately. 3.3 From Annexure-A of the Auditors Report given in Form No. 3CD it is evident that the assessee has borrowed unsecured loans during the previous year from the following persons as detailed below:- Name Amount 1. Smt. Ekta Agarwal 5,00,000/- 2. Shri M. P. Modi

PRAKASH DAVARA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COIMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE 4(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 177/RPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 177/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Prakash Davara, 08, Gitanjali Nagar, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Acupd0169K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-4(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Jain, CAFor Respondent: S/shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR &
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 156Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

cash deposit of Rs.30 lacs in his saving bank account with State Bank of India, Branch: New Shanti Nagar, Raipur, the A.O initiated proceedings u/s.147 of the Act. Notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 06.08.2012 was issued to the assessee. In compliance, the assessee filed his return of income u/s.148 of the Act on 06.08.2012, disclosing an income of Rs.33

SHRI HARISH KUMAR CHHABADA,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

ITA 91/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.91/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated.” 8 Harish Kumar Chhabada Vs. DCIT-1(1) 11. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) taking cognizance of the fact that there was cut throat competition in trading of unbranded goods a/w. the fact that the assessee would have also incurred expenses on salary, freight and other routine expenses in the course

SHRI RAVI KEWALTANI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), BHILAI

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

ITA 278/RPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Ravi Kewaltani, Ito, Ward- 2(1), Bombay Footwear, G.E. Road, Bhilai (Cg). Vs. Pachari Para, Durg (Cg).

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rituparan Namdeo, DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

cash deposit of Rs.5340510/- is unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and deserved to be added in the hands of the assessee. Also penalty proceedings is initiated u/s 271

TOMAN SINGH SAHU,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 499/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.499/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Toman Singh Sahu H. No.1246, Vivekanand Ashram, Ram Kund Para, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Epyps2394L ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

cash deposited of Rs.2,14,00,000/- is added back in the total income of the assessee as per provisions of Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with section 115BBE of the Act. Penalty u/s. 271

DAYARAM AGRAWAL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/RPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.258/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Dayaram Agrawal H-1, Shankar Nagar, Rajeev Nagar, Raipur-492 007 (C.G.) Pan: Acgpa8622C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 131ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are being initiated separately for concealment.” 3. As evident from the aforesaid, the A.O had made addition u/s.69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) with regard to unexplained money i.e. cash deposits

VINOD KUMAR SONI, AMBIKAPUR,AMBIKAPUR vs. ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 18/RPR/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 May 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.18/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vinod Kumar Soni Moulviya Bandh, Namanakala, Chhattisgarh-497 001 Pan: Bukps0274H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Addl./Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax(A)-1, Chandigarh. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Kumar Tiwari &For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 44ASection 69A

Cash Deposit under Section 69A (Unexplained Income/Money). Ld. AO has made addition without considering the entire facts of the case. Hence, addition made is bad in Law, against natural justice and uncalled for and may kindly be deleted. 2. That on the facts and on the circumstances of the case, Ld. Assessing Officer determined the penalty proceedings U/s 271

SIKHA AGRAWAL, RAIGARH,RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAIGARH, RAIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 235/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur28 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.235/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Shikha Agrawal A-9, Ashirbadpuram Colony, Near Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh (C.G.)-496 554 Pan: Cjwpa0265J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Raigarh (C.G) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 271ASection 56(2)(x)Section 69Section 69A

Penalty proceedings under section 271AAC(1) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 are initiated separately. The amount of Rs.1,98,000/- paid in cash for purchase of property is treated as assessee's unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and treated as 4 Shikha Agrawal Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Raigarh assessee's income

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

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

ITA 157/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 May 2019AY 2014-15

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 :

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 223(2)Section 44ASection 55Section 69A

cash deposit is from unexplained sources. The identity of persons may have been proved, but there is no supporting document that transactions had at all taken place. Statements of persons without any documents are not reliable. The addition is therefore sustained. 3.1 Ground (ii) has been taken against computation of capital gains. Facts as per the assessment order

PRAMILA GOKULDAS DAGA GIRLS COLLEGE, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee trust in ITA

ITA 546/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 546 & 547/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Pramila Gokuldas Daga Girls College Bal Ashram Parisar, Kutchery Chowk, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aaatp4369D

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 10(23)(c)Section 144Section 147Section 148

cash deposits specifically when the reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee for the subsequent years i.e. A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17, 2019-20 and 2020-21 had been dropped by the department. 9. Apart from that, the Ld. AR submitted that though the assessee trust in its memorandum of appeal i.e. “Form 35” had specifically opted out of service

PRAMILA GOKULDAS DAGA GIRLS COLLEGE, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee trust in ITA

ITA 547/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 546 & 547/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Pramila Gokuldas Daga Girls College Bal Ashram Parisar, Kutchery Chowk, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Aaatp4369D

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 10(23)(c)Section 144Section 147Section 148

cash deposits specifically when the reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee for the subsequent years i.e. A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17, 2019-20 and 2020-21 had been dropped by the department. 9. Apart from that, the Ld. AR submitted that though the assessee trust in its memorandum of appeal i.e. “Form 35” had specifically opted out of service

BEERASWAMY YOGESHWAR MUDALIAR, AMBIKAPUR,AMBIKAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 36/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.36/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Beeraswamy Yogeshwar Mudaliar Ward No.4, Gandhinagar, Veer Sawarkar Marg, P.O. Ambikapur, Dist. Surguja-497 001 Pan: Bnxpm2592L

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

cash deposits lump sum amount which were received at the time of retirement by way of PF, gratuity and leave encashment. At the same time, the assessee is having diagnosed with cancer and suffering this decease. The penalty u/s. 271

PAGADALA VELUGONDA REDDY, DURG,DURG vs. ACIT-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 726/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Raipur05 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.726/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Pagadala Velugonda Reddy Lig 284, Hudco, Bhilai-490 009 (C.G.) Pan: Abmpv7318K

For Appellant: Shri Yash Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 69

cash deposits as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act. 3. That aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee had filed first appeal before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and detailed written submission a/w. documentary evidence were filed as submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. However, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had dismissed the appeal and did not adjudicate

NARESH KUMAR & SONS HUF,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my observations above

ITA 247/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 247/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Naresh Kumar & Sons Huf 11/3, Near New Bus Stand, Pandri, Govind Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaghn0904E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri G.S. Agrawal, Ca : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 11.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

cash and deposited the same to its own account. Similarly, it has given money to the parties from its own account against the purchases. While as in the case of commission work, no such activity is done. Had it been commission based work, assessee would have only facilitated the work and doing all the work of trading. Therefore, vide note

SEVA RAM SAHU, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(5), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 820/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 820/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 1 Seva Ram Sahu vs. ITO, Ward-1(5) Raipur 3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee, a non-filer of the Income Tax Return (‘ITR’), has made cash deposits

SANDEEP KAUR GILL,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 267/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/934, Shukla Colony, Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs.3,17,452/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act by the A.O. 3 Sandeep Kaur Gill Vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Raipur ITA Nos. 267 & 268/RPR/2022 4. Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee at the threshold of hearing of the appeal submitted that the present appeal involves a delay

SANDEEP KAUR GILL,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 268/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/934, Shukla Colony, Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs.3,17,452/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act by the A.O. 3 Sandeep Kaur Gill Vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Raipur ITA Nos. 267 & 268/RPR/2022 4. Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee at the threshold of hearing of the appeal submitted that the present appeal involves a delay

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 117/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

deposit amount of cost by the appellant within the stipulated time shall lead to automatic dissolution of this order.” 3. Similarly, in ITA No.118/RPR/2024, the Tribunal had not condoned the delay of 597 days and dismissed the appeal, against which the assessee had preferred an appeal which was admitted and adjudicated by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court

ASHOK KUMAR WADHWANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 118/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.117 &118/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ashok Kumar Wadhwani, Ujwal Udyog, Sinodha, Neora, Tilda, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aahpw1400B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

deposit amount of cost by the appellant within the stipulated time shall lead to automatic dissolution of this order.” 3. Similarly, in ITA No.118/RPR/2024, the Tribunal had not condoned the delay of 597 days and dismissed the appeal, against which the assessee had preferred an appeal which was admitted and adjudicated by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court