AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

bogus would not constitute reasons to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment warranting reopening of the assessment. Reopening is not permissible on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. It does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction of the assessing authority. Such reason should be held in good faith Page 4 of 14 I.T.A

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

bogus would not constitute reasons to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment warranting reopening of the assessment. Reopening is not permissible on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. It does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction of the assessing authority. Such reason should be held in good faith Page 4 of 14 I.T.A

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

bogus would not constitute reasons to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment warranting reopening of the assessment. Reopening is not permissible on the basis of borrowed satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. It does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction of the assessing authority. Such reason should be held in good faith Page 4 of 14 I.T.A

SHANKAR CONSTRUCTION,PANCHGACHIA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 565/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Shankar Construction,………………..…….……Appellant Panchgachia, Panchgachia-852124, Bihar [Pan:Abofs0800R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………….……..……Respondent Ward-3(1), Purnea, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashok Kumar, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 18, 2024 O R D E R

reopening the assessment. The majority of the learned Judges in the High Court, in our opinion, were not in error in holding that the said material could not have led to the formation of the belief that the income of the assessee respondent had escaped assessment because of his failure or omission to disclose fully and truly all material facts

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

purchased the agricultural produce from the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid statement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said statement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that the aforesaid income shown

YASHWANT SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

purchased the agricultural produce from the\nassessee. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the aforesaid\nstatement given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai and also noted that the said\nstatement was given by Shri Ram Prakash Rai at the instance of the assessee.\nThe Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee had failed to establish that\nthe aforesaid income shown

SANGEETA GOEL,PATNA vs. CCIT, NFAC, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 211/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sangeeta Goel Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax/Nfac 506, Santosha Complex Vs Fraser Road Bander Bagicha Patna - 800001 [Pan: Acbpg0887A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, Jcit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per, Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 30/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. A. That The Initiation Of Proceeding U/S 147 R.W.S 148 Of The It Act, 1961 Based On Alleged Information Of Bogus Trade Amounting To Rs. 35,09,213/- In The Shares & Securities Of M/S Ayaan Commercial Pvt Ltd Being Bereft Of Fact & Assessee Having Not Carried On Any Such Transaction, The Assumption Of Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The It Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law. B. That The Ld. A.O. Having Rejected The Objection Of The Assessee Although These Facts Are Brought On Record His Action In Doing So Is Bad In Law. C. That The Reopening U/S 147 Was Based On Mere Suspicion & Surmises, The Proceeding U/S 147 R.W.S. 148 Of The It Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law.

bogus long term capital gain. He submitted that the department does not have any credible information or reason to believe on which the assessment proceedings has been initiated. There is no adverse material on record referred by the Assessing Officer in the scrutiny proceedings. The assessment has been concluded only on the basis of statement on oath given by three

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA vs. SUSHILA SULTANIA, PATNA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.475/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Circle-4, Patna……..........................…...........................……….……Appellant Vs. Sushila Sultania, Patna……….............…..….…...……........……...…..…..Respondent 503, Venkatesh Apartment, Dakbunglow Road, Budh Marg, Patna, Bihar-800001. [Pan: Acmps5390M] Appearances By: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Neelkhanth Kandelwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 26 , 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Against The Order Dated 21.05.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Only Issue Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Addition Of Rs.1,84,74,698/- & Rs.8,79,748/- As Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 68 R.W.S. 115Bbe & U/S 69C Respectively. 3. Facts In Brief Are That The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Act On 31.03.2021. The Said Notice Was Duly Complied By The Assessee By Filing Return Of Income On 22.04.2021 Declaring Total Income At Rs.19,11,200/-. The Assessing

reopened the assessment of the case on the ground of credible information received qua the assessee being beneficiary of bogus long- term capital gain. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has undertaken bogus transactions in equity shares amounting to Rs.1,75,94,950/- on which the claim of long-term capital gain of Rs.1,66,22,025/- was claimed

M/S PSP TRADING PVT LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 2 (1), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 25.03.2022, on the ground that the assessee has made bogus and fictitious purchases worth of\n₹49,98,500/- during the year from Divine Alloys & Power Co. Ltd. without actual supply of materials . The assessee filed the return of income on 07.10.2022, declaring total income

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. SHREE NANAK FERRO ALLOYS PVT LTD, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-2 Room No.205, 2Nd Floor, Avrtar Acit, Circle-2, Patna, Bihar Vs. Building, Bisturpur, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaics1706N Assessee By : S/Shri A.K. Rastogi Rakesh Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Md Ah Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2025

reopened by the AO under Section 147 of the Act by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act on 04.11.2015, after the learned Assessing Officer received information from Director of Income Tax (I & CI) that appellant had received bogus entries of cash from hawala operators. The said notice was complied with by the assessee by stating that original return

SARIKA CHOUDHARY,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

purchase of immovable property at Dak Bungalow Road, Patna but the assessee did not produce any proof in support of the alleged investment during survey or even later. The assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Act vide notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 14.03.2012 and the order u/s 147 of the Act was passed on 31.03.2013 assessing