RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-5(1), PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

11,726/-. 7. In assessment year 2013-14, the first payment is of Rs.6,07,335/-. It was paid to nine concerns and claimed Assessment Years: 2012-2013 & 2013-2014 Ravi Lochan Singh under the head “commission”. This payment has been disallowed to the assessee on the ground that the assessee failed to deduct the TDS under section

RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-5(1), PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

11,726/-. 7. In assessment year 2013-14, the first payment is of Rs.6,07,335/-. It was paid to nine concerns and claimed Assessment Years: 2012-2013 & 2013-2014 Ravi Lochan Singh under the head “commission”. This payment has been disallowed to the assessee on the ground that the assessee failed to deduct the TDS under section

ASHA DEVI L/H OF LATE GYAN CHAND PRASAD,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

section is applicable to the appellant's case. 7. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax has failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer has passed the order after conducting proper inquiry and investigation and after due application of mind and thus the order passed could not be said to be either erroneous or prejudicial to the interest

BIJAY KUMAR SARAF,DALDALI BAZAR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. DC/AC CIRCLE 1,MUZFFARPUR, IT-OFFICE, POLICE LINE, SIKANDERPUR MUZZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 194C(6). All the compliance had been complied ITA No.: 205/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bijay Kumar Saraf. by the appellant during the year under consideration as per the prevailing law during the said period. 11. For that the learned commissioner of income tax (Appeals) had failed to appreciate the fact that the payment made in respect

RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 40(a)(ia) is attracted here also. Hence, It is my opinion that the assessee has claimed Rs. 11,41,679/- under the head of commission but he has not deducted TDS

BBCPL-SKPL (JV),JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

11. Sub-section (3) provides that where the ld. Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness of the accounts of the assessee or where the method of accounting provided in sub-section (1) has not been regularly followed by the assessee or income has not been computed in accordance with the standard notified under sub-section

BIHAR STATE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,PATNA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

11,98,185/- and interest on TDS of ₹3,00,815/-.\nAccording to the learned Assessing Officer the said interest is penal in\nnature and therefore, not allowable. In our considered view the said\ninterest is not penal in nature and is allowable expenses when paid in\ncomputing the income of the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the o\norder

BBCPL-RCPL (JV),JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

11. Sub-section (3) provides that where the ld. Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness or completeness of the accounts of the assessee or where the method of accounting provided in sub-section (1) has not been regularly followed by the assessee or income has not been computed in accordance with the standard notified under sub-section

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PATNA,PATNA vs. ACIT, TDS CIRCLE, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), It Is Seen That 5 Notices Of Hearing Were Given But The Same Could Not Be Attended By The Assessee & Thereafter The Action Of Ld. Ao Was Upheld Through The Impugned Order.

11. For that on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in holding that the assessee is liable to deduct tax under the section 194C for NBCC Ltd. by ignoring the fact that the entire invoices for the construction of the building has been raised by Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Ltd. 12. For that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. NORTH BIHAR POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and COs of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

11 ITA No.99/Pat./2025 and CO No.04/Pat/25 ITA No.140/Pat/2025 and CO.No.05/ Pat/2025 ITA No.234/Pat/2025 and CO.No.08/Pat/ 2025 received during the year. Accordingly, the AO added the same to the total income of the assessee. 8.2. In the appellate proceeding, the learned CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under: - “5.3 Ground

MADHYA BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,PATNA vs. C.I.T. -1,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

11. A bare perusal of the sub section-1 would reveal that powers of revision granted by section 263 to the learned Commissioner have four compartments. In the first place, the learned Commissioner may call for and examine the records of any proceedings under this Act. For calling of the record and examination, the learned Commissioner was not required

BALKRISHNA BHALOTIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

11 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Balkrishna Bhalotia Construction Pvt. Ltd. 8. A bare perusal of the sub section-1 would reveal that powers of revision granted by section 263 to the learned Commissioner have four compartments. In the first place, the learned Commissioner may call for and examine the records of any proceedings under this Act. For calling

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S ASHA REALTY DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

11,58,000\nVihar Ph-\nIII\n3,96,94,241\n\n3.2. The learned AO made the addition to the total income of the assessee.\n\n3.3. In the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT (A) allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing and holding as under:-\n\n\"3. Addition on the basis of turnover adopted by the appellant

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

TDS on such payment, therefore, these payments are not to be allowed as a deduction to the assessee under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. He further submitted that effort at the end of the assessee was to frustrate the ld. Assessing Officer for conducting proper inquiries in its accounts. The assessee kept on changing the stand

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,PATNA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 76/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises,………………………..........Appellant C/O. Nirmal & Associates, Nepali Kothi, Opposite Gasoline Petrol Pump, Boring Road, Patna-800001 [Pan:Aarfs8853J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Patna,…………………………………..……………..Respondent, Bihar-800001 Appearances By: Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 5Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 8Th, 2024 O R D E R

TDS and TCS, has claimed a net refund of Rs.1,79,11,640/-. Ld. PCIT also noted that the trade payables were almost 35% of the total turnover. Ld. PCIT also examined the details of sundry creditors exceeding Rs.5,00,000/- each and noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has failed to carry out necessary inquiry/verification about the creditworthiness

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 194C, and therefore such a payment required deduction of TDS while making such payment. However, since the assessee had failed to produce any evidence of deduction or explanation as to why the same is not deductible the AO has correctly held that the assessee is in default u/s 201(1)/1A of the I.T. Act. in respect of such

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 194C, and therefore such a payment required deduction of TDS while making such payment. However, since the assessee had failed to produce any evidence of deduction or explanation as to why the same is not deductible the AO has correctly held that the assessee is in default u/s 201(1)/1A of the I.T. Act. in respect of such

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 194C, and therefore such a payment required deduction of TDS while making such payment. However, since the assessee had failed to produce any evidence of deduction or explanation as to why the same is not deductible the AO has correctly held that the assessee is in default u/s 201(1)/1A of the I.T. Act. in respect of such