ITAT Patna Bench

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR, MUZAFFARPUR vs AJIT KUMAR, BETTIAH

the Hon'ble ITAT.” Brief facts of the case as mentioned in written submission filed by the assessee are as under: “1. The assessee is a food grain dealer cum manufacturer of rice, situated in Narkatiyaganj West Champaran, Bihar. 2. A survey was conducted on 30.08.2017, in the business premises of the assessee. Loose sheets marked as JKJ-10, JKJ-41 and JKJ-42 were impounded during survey containing the details of business transactions in a day book from January 2017 to July 2017. 3. On the b

SURENDRA PRASAD BHARVE,SAMASTIPUR vs ITO, WARD- 3 (4), SAMASTIPUR

SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

JAYA NURSING HOME,NALANDA vs ITO, WARD- 2 (3), BIHARSHARIF

the learned CIT(A). However, the appeal was dismissed ex parte on account of non-compliance on various dates, thereby sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The primary contention of the assessee is that both the assessment order and the order of the learned CIT(A) were passed ex parte without providing proper opportunity of hearing. It was submitted that in the interest of justice, one more chance may be granted to

VIKASH KUMAR,PATNA vs ITO, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

this Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application supported by an affidavit, explaining the reasons for the delay. After considering the submissions and going through the petition, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in filing the

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA, PATNA vs GOVERDHAN SILK PVT. LTD., BHAGALPUR

AMAR JYOTI INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD,PATNA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2 (1), PATNA

the learned CIT(A). However, due to non-prosecution, the appeal was dismissed ex parte, thereby sustaining the assessment order. 5. Dissatisfied with the above order the assessee has now come in

SHARWAN KUMAR DARUKA,AMARPUR, BANKA vs CIT(A), PATNA

the learned CIT(A). However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution, thereby sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. The assessee has now preferred appeal before this Tribunal, raising multiple grounds. The primary contention is that the order of the learned CIT(A) is ex parte and passed without adjudicating the issues on merits. Therefore, another opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate his claim. 6. On the other hand, the learned DR su

SHARWAN KUMAR DARUKA,AMARPUR, BANKA vs CIT(A), PATNA

the learned CIT(A). However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution, thereby sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. The assessee has now preferred appeal before this Tribunal, raising multiple grounds. The primary contention is that the order of the learned CIT(A) is ex parte and passed without adjudicating the issues on merits. Therefore, another opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate his claim. 6. On the other hand, the learned DR su

GANESH KUMAR KHEMKA,PATNA vs ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

SHARMA NAND SINGH,PATNA vs ITO, WARD- 6 94), PATNA

this Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application supported by an affidavit, explaining the reasons for the delay. After considering the submissions and going through the petition, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in filing the

RAJESH KUMAR,PATNA vs ITO, WARD- 3 (2), GAYA

SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

MOHAMMAD SHAMIM UDDIN,GAYA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), GAYA, GAYA

the learned CIT(A). However, due to non-compliance on various dates, the CIT(A) sustained the additions by passing an ex parte order, sustaining the order of the Assessing officer. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Despite repeated notices issued by the Registry, neither the assessee nor his learned AR appeared. We cannot keep the matter pending indefinitely. Therefore, with the assistance of the learned DR and on perusal of the material av

LAKSHMI MANDAL,MADHUBANI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, MADHUBANI

SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

RAJEEV KUMAR,BIHAR vs ITO WARD 2(2), CHAPRA, BIHAR

the learned CIT(A), where Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty. Aggrieved, by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the very assessment order, based on which penalty was levied, has already been set aside by this Tribunal vide order dated 26.08.2025 in ITA No. 142/Patna/2025. Consequently, the penalty order has no independent existence in the eyes of law. He therefore submitted t

RAJEEV KUMAR,BIHAR vs ITO WARD 2(2), CHAPRA, BIHAR

the learned CIT(A), where Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty. Aggrieved, by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the very assessment order, based on which penalty was levied, has already been set aside by this Tribunal vide order dated 26.08.2025 in ITA No. 142/Patna/2025. Consequently, the penalty order has no independent existence in the eyes of law. He therefore submitted t

ASHUTOSH SHAH,PATNA vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CIRCLE -4 , PATNA

this Bench. In this connection, the assessee has filed a petition explaining the reasons for such delay. Upon considering the submissions and materials placed, we are satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 143 days is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief Facts of the Case are that the assessee filed return of income for the year under consideration declaring income of ₹10,36,550/-. The case was selected for limited scrut

MARUTI ENTERPRISES,VAISHALI vs DY. CIT, CIR-1, PATNA

S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

SHRI NARNAULIYE AGRAWAL SEWA SAMITI,SHERGHATI GAYA vs CIT EXEMPTION, PATNA

SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

SHRI NARNAULIYE AGRAWAL SEWA SAMITI,SHER GHATI GAYA vs CIT EXEMPTION, PATNA

SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

SANJAY YADAV,JAHANABAD vs NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)