ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), RAIPUR vs. PSA CONSTRUCTION, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

145(3) of the Act showing net profit @8% of the total turnover. It was the observation of the ld. AO that during the survey proceedings, the assessee was provided with sufficient opportunity/time to produce the books of accounts supporting with vouchers and other documents but the assessee was failed to comply with the same. During the assessment proceedings

VISHAL BUILDERS, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.263/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vishal Builders 7/619, Gawri Bhawan, Fafadih Naka, Raipur-492001(C.G.) Pan : Aaefv1401G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Raipur, C.G.

68,296 0.36% 13,06,644 1.06% on secured loan 8 Vishal Builders vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) To salary 14,25,700 1.01% 24,03,790 1.29% 36,38,417 2.95% expenses 10. Considering the aforesaid facts, we find substance in the claim of the Ld. AR that the comparative analysis of the financial statements

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

145 2003 CAL Goenka Agencies v. Commissioner of Income-tax in order to keep harmonious business relationship with its supplier, made some payment to him in cash - Assessee claimed that cash payment had been made under unavoidable circumstances and as such same should be deducted from his income. Assessing Officer, however, rejected assessee’s claim and added said cash payment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

145 2003 CAL Goenka Agencies v. Commissioner of Income-tax in order to keep harmonious business relationship with its supplier, made some payment to him in cash - Assessee claimed that cash payment had been made under unavoidable circumstances and as such same should be deducted from his income. Assessing Officer, however, rejected assessee’s claim and added said cash payment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

145 2003 CAL Goenka Agencies v. Commissioner of Income-tax in order to keep harmonious business relationship with its supplier, made some payment to him in cash - Assessee claimed that cash payment had been made under unavoidable circumstances and as such same should be deducted from his income. Assessing Officer, however, rejected assessee’s claim and added said cash payment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

145 2003 CAL Goenka Agencies v. Commissioner of Income-tax in order to keep harmonious business relationship with its supplier, made some payment to him in cash - Assessee claimed that cash payment had been made under unavoidable circumstances and as such same should be deducted from his income. Assessing Officer, however, rejected assessee’s claim and added said cash payment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

145 2003 CAL Goenka Agencies v. Commissioner of Income-tax in order to keep harmonious business relationship with its supplier, made some payment to him in cash - Assessee claimed that cash payment had been made under unavoidable circumstances and as such same should be deducted from his income. Assessing Officer, however, rejected assessee’s claim and added said cash payment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. MESERS SHREE JAGDAMBA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 37 To 42/Rpr/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2014-15)

145 2003 CAL Goenka Agencies v. Commissioner of Income-tax in order to keep harmonious business relationship with its supplier, made some payment to him in cash - Assessee claimed that cash payment had been made under unavoidable circumstances and as such same should be deducted from his income. Assessing Officer, however, rejected assessee’s claim and added said cash payment

SMT SMT. PRIYA SONI,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(5), RAIPUR (CG)

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.32/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Smt. Priya Soni, Vs Ito, Ward-4(5), Raipur C/O-M/S Shivani Jewellers Ramnarayan Soni, Lilli Chowk, Purani Basti, Raipur Pan No. : Awips 5478 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

145(3) of the Act and worked out net profit at 6.28% on the 3 turnover of Rs. 2,07,55,996/- at Rs. 13,03,476/- and considered the same as the total income by making an addition of Rs.7,28,286/-. Further the AO observed that the assessee had also taken unsecured loan amounting to Rs.36

SHRI SHRI SHIV SHANKAR AGRAWAL,KORBA(CG) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, KORBA(CG)

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 270/Rpr/2016) (Assessment Year: 2008-09)

Section 145(2), or (ii) the Learned AO is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness of the account, or (iii) where the assessee is not following any method of accounting regularly; 3.7 It is a settled principle of law that if no such finding is given then income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SUPER IRON AND STEEL PVT LTD.,, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.261/Rpr/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit-4(1), Raipur Vs M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.13/Rpr/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.261/Rpr/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Super Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit-4(1), Raipur Pritpal Farm House, Vip Road, Raipur(C.G.) Pan No. : Aaics 2579 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

145 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with section 3 of Central Excise Act, 1944 - Method of accounting - Valuation of stock - Assessment year 1987-88 - Assessee was carrying on business of manufacture and sale of television sets - Assessing Officer found that assessee had not included in closing stock, element of excise duty - Accordingly, he made addition to income

SHRI SHRI PRAVIN SINGH S/O RAM BHAROSE SINGH, BHILAI,BHILAI(CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), BHILAI(CG)

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.04/Rpr/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Pravin Singh, The Deputy S/O.Ram Bharose Singh, Vs Commissioner Of Income Hotel Madhuram Matri Nagar, Tax Bhilai-1(1), Risali Bhilai (C.G.) Bhilai(C.G.) Pan: Ajbps 7385 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri R.B.Doshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Piyush Tripathi – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/04/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-Ii, Raipur, Dated 07.10.2016 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 23.03.2015Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The I.T.Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2010-11. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Partially Allowing The Appeal By Partially Considering The Facts Of The Case. Shri Pravin Singh [A]

145(3) of the Act. Subsequently, the AO i.e. DCIT-1, Bhilai(C.G.) issued a notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 25.04.2013 which was duly served on assessee on 02.05.2013. The AO has recorded reasons for reopening which are appearing in the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act dated

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX01(2), RAIPUR (CG) vs. M/S ISHWAR ISPAT INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD,, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

3 Assessment Year : 2009-2010 units per NT. The furnace oil consumption during the relevant period was 53 Ltrs. Per MT and that considering the past consistent record of burning loss oscillating around 2.25%, the burning loss for this year is reasonably accepted at 2.25% and balance 1% of claim of excess burning loss is disallowed. Therefore, adopting the rate

SANTOSH CHOPRA,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 220/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Santosh Chopra, D-3, Faristha Complex, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Acipj9443J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Circle-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

section 145(3) 3 Santosh Chopra Vs. ITO, Circle- 3(4), Raipur of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Hence, the addition is illusionary and based merely on suspicion and so should be deleted. 5. That the addition sustained by the Ld. CIT (A) is arbitrary under the facts and circumstances of the case and also, there is no justification

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)

3 are general in nature and do not require any adjudication. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. 12 DCIT-1(1) vs. Shanta Techno Private Limited 5. Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid order by Ld. CIT(A) now the department felt aggrieved and, therefore, had filed the present appeal. 6. At the outset, Ld. Sr. DR representing

MESERS METEX ENGINEERS,BHILAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BHILAI

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, Reliance is placed on the following decision:- s. Title Citation Authority No. 1. Atharva Rainbow Infratech ITA No. Hon’ble ITAT, Raipur vs. 177/RPR/2016 Bench DCIT-l(l), Raipur dated 01.04.2022 5.9 Moreover, there is nothing on record which establishes that the income had accrued or arisen to the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BHILAI vs. MESERS METEX ENGINEERS, BHILAI

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, Reliance is placed on the following decision:- s. Title Citation Authority No. 1. Atharva Rainbow Infratech ITA No. Hon’ble ITAT, Raipur vs. 177/RPR/2016 Bench DCIT-l(l), Raipur dated 01.04.2022 5.9 Moreover, there is nothing on record which establishes that the income had accrued or arisen to the assessee

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

In the result, appeal in ITA No

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.

section 145(3) of the L.T.Act. For the reasons detailed above, the purchases recorded in the books of account of the assessee amounting to Rs.2,87,51,400/- are held to be bogus and 25% of such purchase amount works out of Rs.71,87,850/- is hereby added to the total income of the assessee in respect of transaction

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

In the result, appeal in ITA No

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.

section 145(3) of the L.T.Act. For the reasons detailed above, the purchases recorded in the books of account of the assessee amounting to Rs.2,87,51,400/- are held to be bogus and 25% of such purchase amount works out of Rs.71,87,850/- is hereby added to the total income of the assessee in respect of transaction