ITAT Ranchi Bench
1,968 judgments
SANDEEP KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
MAKHAN LAL GUPTA,DHANBAD vs ITO WARD 1(1), DHANBAD
S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
JHARKHAND STATE LIVELIHOOD PROMOTION SOCIETY,DHURWA vs EXEMPTION WARD, RANCHI
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
MRITUNJAY KUMAR SINGH,RANCHI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD W2(2), RANCHI, RANCHI
the AO as during the assessment proceedings also, all the relevant documents were not furnished.
KIRIT KUMAR THAKKAR,MAIN ROAD vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, MAIN ROAD
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
RAJENDRA PRASAD,PALAMAU, SATBARWA vs ITO, DALTONGANJ
S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
NIRMAL KUMAR PRADEEP KUMAR ,MAIN ROAD. RANCHI vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI
S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR vs M/S HALLMARK SUPPLIERS PVT.LTD., HOWRAH
S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
MONGIA STEEL LIMITED,GIRIDIH vs ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE,, DHANBAD
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
SUNILA JHA ,BOKARO vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD THREE(FOUR), BOKARO
S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
VISHNU KUMAR BHARTIA,RANCHI vs ITO WARD-3(2), RANCHI
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
SAI ENGINEERING,ANGUL vs ITO WARD- 1(3), JAMSHEDPUR
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
PREM LATA SHARMA,RANCHI vs ITO WARD 2(4) RANCHI, RANCHI
the Assessing Officer. It was a submission that no evidence has been produced in regard to the transactions done by the assessee. It was the prayer that the order of the Assessing Officer and that of the order of Id.CIT(A) is liable to be upheld.
AUTO PROFILES LIMITED,JHARKHAND vs DCIT CIRCLE-1, JHARKHAND
REENA KHETAN,KODERMA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, KODERMA
S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
SUMAN DEVI,JAMSHEDPUR vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD3(1) JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
MANTOSH KUMAR,BOKARO STEEL CITY vs ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), I T , KOLKATA, KOLKATA
S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
JHARKHAND BHAWAN EVAM ANAY SANIRMAN KARMKAR KALYAN BOARD,RANCHI vs ITO WARD 1(1), RANCHI
the Id. CIT(A), who vide the impugned order, confirmed the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer.
JHARKHAND BHAWAN EVAM ANAY SANIRMAN KARMKAR KALYAN BOARD,RANCHI vs ITO WARD 1(1), RANCHI
SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)
JHARKHAND BHAWAN EVAM ANAY SANIRMAN KARMKAR KALYAN BOARD,RANCHI vs ITO WARD 1(1), RANCHI
the Id. CIT(A), who vide the impugned order, confirmed the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer.
