M/S PURVI FINVEST LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1),, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee company being devoid and bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

section 68, applicable w.e.f from AY 2013-13, not only is the assessee required to explain the source of share application money, but in case the applicant is a company, then the said applicant company is also required to explain the source of money in is handing out of which the amount of share application money was advanced

KAMLESH KUKREJA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 379/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16)

68. In addition to the above, the time granted to the petitioner to respond to the notice dated 30.05.2022 – the period of two weeks –is also required to be excluded by virtue of the third proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act. The petitioner had furnished its response to the notice under Section 148A

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), BILASPUR vs. M/S JAYEM HOLDING PVT. LTD., BILASPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the department in ITA no

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the revenue and cross objections to the impugned appeal filed by the assessee are directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jabalpur (camp at Bilaspur) for the assessment year 2014-15, dated 26.03.2018, which in turn has 2 & CO No. 08/RPR/2018 arisen

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. SHRI VINAY AGRAWAL, MAHASAMUND

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 29 & 30/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15, 2015-16)

68. In addition to the above, the time granted to the petitioner to respond to the notice dated 30.05.2022 – the period of two weeks –is also required to be excluded by virtue of the third proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act. The petitioner had furnished its response to the notice under Section 148A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. SHRI VINAY AGRAWAL, MAHASAMUND

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 29 & 30/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15, 2015-16)

68. In addition to the above, the time granted to the petitioner to respond to the notice dated 30.05.2022 – the period of two weeks –is also required to be excluded by virtue of the third proviso to Section 149(1) of the Act. The petitioner had furnished its response to the notice under Section 148A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1), BHILAI vs. SHRI NITIN SANKHLA, DURG

In the result, grounds no 2 to 7 on this single issue of the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.98/Rpr/2020 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax- Vs Shri Nitin Sankhla 1(1), Bhilai 1St Floor, Navkar Bullion, Above Navin Jeweller, Jawahar Chowk, Durg Pan No. :Bbups 4874 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. : Shri Ravi Agarwal, Ca "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ila M. Parmar, Cit- Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/06/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM : The revenue has filed this appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Raipur (CIT(A)) dated 17.08.2020 for the assessment year 2017-18, on the following grounds:- 1. “Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was justified

EAST WEST FINVEST INDIA LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPR

In the result, appeal of the assessee company being devoid and bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

section 68, applicable w.e.f from AY 2013-13, not only is the assessee required to explain the source of share application money, but in case the applicant is a company, then the said applicant company is also required to explain the source of money in is handing out of which the amount of share application money was advanced

M/S TRIMURTHY FINVEST LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assesse company being devoid and bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

section 68, applicable w.e.f from AY 2013-13, not only is the assessee required to explain the source of share application money, but in case the applicant is a company, then the said applicant company is also required to explain the source of money in is handing out of which the amount of share application money was advanced

MESERS S R INGOSTS PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAIPUR

In the result Revised Ground no 4 of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.04/Rpr/2020 (Assessment Year: 2011-2012) M/S S R Ingots Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Cc-1, Raipur House No.16, Opp.Cg Gramin Bank, Choubey Colony, Raipur Pan No. :Aaics 5559 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Kumar Singh & Smt. Surbhi Jain, Ars राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 12/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM : The assessee has filed this appeal against the order passed by the CIT(A)-3, Bhopal, dated 18.11.2019 for the assessment year 2011-2012, on the following grounds :- 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming order u/s 147 r.w.s

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

D (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee by : Shri Akshay Ringasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar Chawda, CAs. Department by : Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 11/08/2021. Date of pronouncement : 17/09/2021. Order Under Section 254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited

MESERS GOYAL INFRAVENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

D (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee by : Shri Akshay Ringasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar Chawda, CAs. Department by : Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 11/08/2021. Date of pronouncement : 17/09/2021. Order Under Section 254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

D (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee by : Shri Akshay Ringasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar Chawda, CAs. Department by : Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 11/08/2021. Date of pronouncement : 17/09/2021. Order Under Section 254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

D (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee by : Shri Akshay Ringasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar Chawda, CAs. Department by : Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 11/08/2021. Date of pronouncement : 17/09/2021. Order Under Section 254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited

MESERS GOYAL ENERGY & STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singh

D (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee by : Shri Akshay Ringasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar Chawda, CAs. Department by : Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 11/08/2021. Date of pronouncement : 17/09/2021. Order Under Section 254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This group of five appeals, out of which four appeals by Goyal Energy & Steel Private Limited

AGRAWAL INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, RAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.10 & 11/Rpr/2020 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Agrawal Infrabuild Private Limited, Vs Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Raipur 1St Floor, V.R.Plaza, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aafca 6636 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

D 2011-12 32110960 58707300 26596340 26596340 0 2012-13 39603200 88827580 49224392 49224392 0 2013-14 46880610 90788810 43908200 43908200 0 2014-15 23920030 50757060 26837030 26837030 0 2015-16 30643480 50239500 19596020 19596020 0 2016-17 32901140 39405810 6504670 6504670 0 17,26,66,652/- 17,26,66,652/- Note:- For A.Y. 2017-18 the assessee has under

AGRAWAL INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, RAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.10 & 11/Rpr/2020 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Agrawal Infrabuild Private Limited, Vs Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Raipur 1St Floor, V.R.Plaza, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aafca 6636 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

D 2011-12 32110960 58707300 26596340 26596340 0 2012-13 39603200 88827580 49224392 49224392 0 2013-14 46880610 90788810 43908200 43908200 0 2014-15 23920030 50757060 26837030 26837030 0 2015-16 30643480 50239500 19596020 19596020 0 2016-17 32901140 39405810 6504670 6504670 0 17,26,66,652/- 17,26,66,652/- Note:- For A.Y. 2017-18 the assessee has under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1), RAIPUR vs. MESERS VANDANA ISPAT LIMITED, RAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM : This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order passed by the CIT(A)-I, Raipur, 21.04.2019 for the assessment year 2013-2014, on the following grounds :- 1. “Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. S.P. BUILDCON PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 35 & 38/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V S.P. Buildcon Private Limited Circle-1(1), S Ff-06, Shyam Plaza, Pandri Bus Stand, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Raipur Pan: Aajcs0653H (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Amit M. Jain, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05-09-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2023

d) and assessee’s transactions is an eligible transaction, it cannot be termed as speculative transaction.” Commissioner of Income Tax vs Vasavi Gold & Bullion Pvt. Ltd. [High Court of Madras] [(2018) 101 CCH 0380 Chen HC]. “If transaction carried out by assessee is non speculative transaction, then Section 43(5) shall not be attracted and if assessee is trading