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

31,140/-. This amount has been disallowed to the assessee on the ground that while making commission payment to Assessment Years: 2012-2013 & 2013-2014 Ravi Lochan Singh Monisha Rao Saraswati, Ankita Saikia and Surya Narayan Mishra, the assessee did not deduct the TDS. The assessee has filed copies of their income tax return and submitted that the recipients have

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

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

31-3-2014 was to be allowed as deduction under section 37(1)" Copy of judgments is enclosed. 7. That the appellant states that in the above order of assessment, the Id assessing officer, without giving the appellant any opportunity much less sufficient opportunity, held that the amount of Rs.66,47,34,169/- claimed as deduction under Section

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

31-3-2014 was to be allowed as deduction under section 37(1)" Copy of judgments is enclosed. 7. That the appellant states that in the above order of assessment, the Id assessing officer, without giving the appellant any opportunity much less sufficient opportunity, held that the amount of Rs.66,47,34,169/- claimed as deduction under Section

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

31-3-2014 was to be allowed as deduction under section 37(1)" Copy of judgments is enclosed. 7. That the appellant states that in the above order of assessment, the Id assessing officer, without giving the appellant any opportunity much less sufficient opportunity, held that the amount of Rs.66,47,34,169/- claimed as deduction under Section

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

31-3-2014 was to be allowed as deduction under section 37(1)" Copy of judgments is enclosed. 7. That the appellant states that in the above order of assessment, the Id assessing officer, without giving the appellant any opportunity much less sufficient opportunity, held that the amount of Rs.66,47,34,169/- claimed as deduction under Section

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

31-3-2014 was to be allowed as deduction under section 37(1)" Copy of judgments is enclosed. 7. That the appellant states that in the above order of assessment, the Id assessing officer, without giving the appellant any opportunity much less sufficient opportunity, held that the amount of Rs.66,47,34,169/- claimed as deduction under Section

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

31-3-2014 was to be allowed as deduction under section 37(1)" Copy of judgments is enclosed. 7. That the appellant states that in the above order of assessment, the Id assessing officer, without giving the appellant any opportunity much less sufficient opportunity, held that the amount of Rs.66,47,34,169/- claimed as deduction under Section

ASHISH RANJAN,DARBHANGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DARBHANGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS on the part of the employer cannot be slapped on\nthe assessee more so no action against the employer can be taken\nunder the Act. The case of the assessee find support from the\ndecision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Shri Cintan Bindra\nVs. DCIT vide order dated 29.11.2023 in WP(C) No. 2164/2022

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

31, 2023 Date of pronouncing the order : June 02, 2023 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Principal Commissioner of Income 1 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank Tax-1, Patna dated 01.02.2016 passed under section 263 of the Income

AL-RABIA MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL WELFARE & TRUST,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

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

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

section 143(2) was issued or not; whether the assessee has filed its regular return of income or not. The assessment order straightway commenced from the factum of carrying out a survey upon the premises of the assessee and thereafter reproduced the final survey report submitted to ld. CCIT, Patna. This letter is reproduced from first page of the assessment

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]

TDS return filed by acquirer but the assessee did not declare any capital gains in its ITR. Accordingly, statutory notices were issued to the assessee and in compliance to such notices, assessee has furnished the following documents at the time of hearing before the AO: “i. Assessee is a farmer and the land which was compulsory on acquisition and compensation

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

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