SUKHDEV SINGH JOSHI,JAGDALPUR, BASTAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, JAGDALPUR, JAGDALPUR

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 173 & 174/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

144B of the Act, dated 23.09.2021 and penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) dated 17.02.2022, passed by Addl / Joint / Deputy / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax / Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi, (in short “Ld. AR”). Sukhdev Singh Joshi vs. ITO, Ward, Jagdalpur 2. Since both the aforesaid appeals pertain to the same assessee, having common and interconnected issues, therefore, these appeals

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. ITO, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

u/s 271(1)(b) on account of non-compliances of statutory notices issued and the Learned CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in confirming the same, as the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause from making compliance, as such, the penalty is contrary to facts, law and legislative intent, hence, it is prayed that

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI vs. ITO, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

u/s 271(1)(b) on account of non-compliances of statutory notices issued and the Learned CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in confirming the same, as the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause from making compliance, as such, the penalty is contrary to facts, law and legislative intent, hence, it is prayed that

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI vs. ITO,WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

u/s 271(1)(b) on account of non-compliances of statutory notices issued and the Learned CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in confirming the same, as the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause from making compliance, as such, the penalty is contrary to facts, law and legislative intent, hence, it is prayed that

ASHAP KUMAR SHANTIEL BARA, RAIGARH, RAIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAIGARH, RAIGARH

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 486 & 487/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16)

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), dated 10.06.2025 & 13.06.2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-16, which in turn arises from the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 02.03.2023 and penalty order 271

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

271(1)(c) of the Act was initiated, but after rectifying u/s. 154, this penalty does not attract. In response to the notice u/s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961 the assessee filed return of his income on 24-04-2018 vide Ack. No.612516340240418 showing total taxable salary income of Rs.3,02,680/- is accepted, and therefore, the order passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR vs. VIRENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 485/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur (C.G.)

144B of the Act, dated 11.05.2021 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.15,66,68,438/-, after inter alia, making the following additions: Sr. No. Particulars Amount 1. Addition of personal unsecured loan raised by Rs.8,15,00,000/- the assessee u/s. 68 of the Act. 2. Addition of fresh unsecured loans taken during Rs.4

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BILASPUR vs. MS MAYURA SARIA PVT. LTD., BILASPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 430/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16)

144B of the Act, dated 30.03.2023. 2 DCIT, Bilaspur Vs. M/s Mayura Saria Pvt. Ltd. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are reads as under: 1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case Id. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.3,81,04,820/- made by the AO on account

ARUNA TIWARI,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 90/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Aruna Tiwari 762, Sundar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adbpt4977B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

144B of placed upon the following judicial the Act was passed on 29.03.2022 assessing pronouncements:- the total income at Rs.93,62,150/-. i) CIT v. Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. Ltd (2019) 102 taxmann.com 48 (Bom. HC), ii) M/s. Prachi Agriculture & Properties Pvt. Ltd v. Pr.CIT-1, Raipur in ITA No.30/RRR/2021 (21.04.2022) (ITAT Raipur). iii) Arihant Jewellers Private Limited v Pr.CIT