MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

TDS showing salary to employees. Since these incomes remained unexplained in the absence of a return of income, therefore, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee but the assessee failed to file the return and despite giving sufficient opportunities failed to respond to the notices issued. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred

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

TDS as PANs of the transporters were provided to the Ld. AO. 8. As regards Ground No. 3, the notice under section 148

PAVAN KUMAR BHAGAT,SAHARSA vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 271AAC, 272A(1)(d) and 271F of the Act. 17. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed his return of income for the year under consideration and as per information available with the Assessing Officer (hereinafter

ASHOK KUMAR,BHOJPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, ARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

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

148 (ASR.) (MAG.) on the ground that even if book results are rejected, Assessing Officer is duty 5 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Ashok Kumar bound to make a fair and reasonable estimate of income based on evidence and material on record; he cannot make an addition in an arbitrary manner or on basis of personal vendetta. The Assessing Officer

HYGIENIC PRODUCTS FOR COMMON CITIZENS,MADHEPURA vs. ITO WARD 3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARSA

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

TDS statement, in-\nterest received. Hence, AO passed assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read\nwith section 144B dated 29.02.2024 by making total addition of Rs.6,31,764/-\nto the income of the appellant.\n\n6.1 It is to be noted here that the appellant had not filed any submission in the\ncourse of the appeal. It is pertinent that

ANIL KUMAR,NALANDA vs. ITO, WARD- 2 (3), BIHARSHARIF

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 361/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anil Kumar National Faceless Assessment Centre M/S Raj Trading Company, Nfac, Delhi Harnaut, Nalanda, Patna-803110 Vs Bihar [Pan : Azopc268H] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

Section 40(a)(ia). 10. For that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is wrong, illegal and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 11. For that the appellant reserves its right to furnish detailed written submission along with documents and evidences on or before date of hearing. 12. For that the appellant

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 2(1) PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 147 of the Act after recording reasons and obtaining prior approval from the competent authority. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 21.04.2016. In response, the assessee e-filed its return on 03.06.2016 declaring total income of ₹8,00,00,000/-. Thereafter notices

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, COR-2, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 147 of the Act after recording reasons and obtaining prior approval from the competent authority. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 21.04.2016. In response, the assessee e-filed its return on 03.06.2016 declaring total income of ₹8,00,00,000/-. Thereafter notices

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, P)ATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 147 of the Act after recording reasons and obtaining prior approval from the competent authority. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 21.04.2016. In response, the assessee e-filed its return on 03.06.2016 declaring total income of ₹8,00,00,000/-. Thereafter notices

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 147 of the Act after recording reasons and obtaining prior approval from the competent authority. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 21.04.2016. In response, the assessee e-filed its return on 03.06.2016 declaring total income of ₹8,00,00,000/-. Thereafter notices

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 147 of the Act after recording reasons and obtaining prior approval from the competent authority. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 21.04.2016. In response, the assessee e-filed its return on 03.06.2016 declaring total income of ₹8,00,00,000/-. Thereafter notices

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN.LTD.,PATNA vs. CIT (APPEAL), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 147 of the Act after recording reasons and obtaining prior approval from the competent authority. Thereafter, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 21.04.2016. In response, the assessee e-filed its return on 03.06.2016 declaring total income of ₹8,00,00,000/-. Thereafter notices

ASHISH RANJAN,DARBHANGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DARBHANGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

148 taxmann.com 329/292 Taxman 138/452 ITR 107\n(Delhi). The relevant observations made in the said judgment are set forth hereafter:\n\"5. Mr Sanjay Kumar, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf\nof the respondents/revenue, says that the credit for withholding tax can only be\ngiven in terms of Section 199 of the Act, when the amount

MASUDAN TANTI,BHAGALPUR vs. CIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

148 was issued and later order was passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act. Subsequently Appeal was filled and appeal was also rejected on the ground that documents and reply not submitted. Later, after so many request on 21.05.2024 the appellant had able to collect the ledger and Form 27D from BIHAR STATE

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

TDS deducted thereon, register marked as NPT-02, details about cash receipt from different persons referred in seized material NPT-02. Reference also made to seized document BKC-03, MCT-10, MCT-13, NPT-01. Ld. Pr. CIT also asked the assessee to explain about the page wise description of receipt and payment written in the seized material marked

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

TDS deducted thereon, register marked as NPT-02, details about cash receipt from different persons referred in seized material NPT-02. Reference also made to seized document BKC-03, MCT-10, MCT-13, NPT-01. Ld. Pr. CIT also asked the assessee to explain about the page wise description of receipt and payment written in the seized material marked

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

TDS deducted thereon, register marked as NPT-02, details about cash receipt from different persons referred in seized material NPT-02. Reference also made to seized document BKC-03, MCT-10, MCT-13, NPT-01. Ld. Pr. CIT also asked the assessee to explain about the page wise description of receipt and payment written in the seized material marked

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

TDS deducted thereon, register marked as NPT-02, details about cash receipt from different persons referred in seized material NPT-02. Reference also made to seized document BKC-03, MCT-10, MCT-13, NPT-01. Ld. Pr. CIT also asked the assessee to explain about the page wise description of receipt and payment written in the seized material marked

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

TDS deducted thereon, register marked as NPT-02, details about cash receipt from different persons referred in seized material NPT-02. Reference also made to seized document BKC-03, MCT-10, MCT-13, NPT-01. Ld. Pr. CIT also asked the assessee to explain about the page wise description of receipt and payment written in the seized material marked