KUMAR ARUNODAYA,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 6, PATNA [NEW – DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, PATNA], PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

KUMAR ARUNOSAYA,PATNA vs. A.O., CIRCLE-6, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

PUNRASAR JUTE PARK LIMITED,PURNEA vs. CIT, PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member:- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 1 Punrasar Jute Park Limited National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 17th April, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

ACIT, PATNA vs. NEW ERA SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT WELFARE SOCIETY, PATNA

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

13(10) of the Act deserves to be extracted: “[10) Where the provisions of sub-section (8) are applicable to any trust or institution or it violates the conditions specified under clause (b) or clause (ba) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, its income chargeable to tax shall be computed after allowing deduction for the expenditure (other than capital

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

D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2013-14 dated 26.11.2022 passed against

ITO, WARD-4(1), PATNA vs. JAGDISH RAY, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of revenue-ITA No

D E R 1. ITA No.102/Pat/20 AY 2014-15 & CO No.01/Pat/2021 (ITA No. 102/Pat/20) AY 2014-15 Jagdish Ray PER MANISH BORAD, AM. This captioned appeal and corresponding cross objection of the revenue and assessee for the assessment year 2014-15 are directed against the order dt. 30.06.2020 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [ hereinafter, referred

DOLLY GHOSH,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-3 dated 31st December, 2021 passed for A.Y. 2012- 13. 2. The assessee has challenged reopening of assessment by issuance of a notice under section 148 of the Income

SANJIV KUMAR SINGH,HATHINI vs. NFAC, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 323/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Sanjiv Kumar Singh,………………...…………Appellant 23 S/O. Barhma Singh, At Po Hathni, Rohitas-802215, Bihar [Pan:Bmsps6887A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…..………………………...Respondent Nfac, New Delhi Appearances By: Smt. Smriti Singh, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 03, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 31, 2024 O R D E R

D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dated 14th September, 2023 passed for Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income declaring total taxable income of Rs.7,34,940/- for the assessment year

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

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna dated 28.01.2015 passed for A.Y. 2009-10. 1 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 M/s. Kumar Construction 2. Grounds No. 1, 2 & 3 are inter-connected grounds therefore we first take these grounds

BAIJU ROY,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-4(2), PATNA

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

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

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Baiju Roy (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 17.12.2021 passed for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (1), PATNA

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

Bench: the sale of immovable properties on which long term capital gain was derived.

D E R PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 24.06.2025, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077736170(1) raising various

RUSHATAM KHAN,PURNEA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, PURNEA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

13,00,000/- & Rs. 15,00,000 on records. 5. For that the CIT (Appeal) erred in passing ex-parte order confirming disallowance and addition of Rs.5,14,090/- i.e. 25% of cost of improvement of Rs. Rs. 20,56,360/- a sum of (Rs.9,90,560/- & Rs. 10,65,800/-), relevant to two sold property discussed, disallowed and added

RUSHATAM KHAN,PURNEA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, PURNEA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

13,00,000/- & Rs. 15,00,000 on records. 5. For that the CIT (Appeal) erred in passing ex-parte order confirming disallowance and addition of Rs.5,14,090/- i.e. 25% of cost of improvement of Rs. Rs. 20,56,360/- a sum of (Rs.9,90,560/- & Rs. 10,65,800/-), relevant to two sold property discussed, disallowed and added

SUBODH KUMAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO WARD -6(2), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 258/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Subodh Kumar Singh,…………………..…………Appellant B-1, Vaishavi Apartment, Behind Petrol Pump, Sadagaut Ashram, Patna-800010, Bihar [Pan:Cdfps1206N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…..…………………………..Respondent Ward-6(2), Patna, Bihar Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashok Kumar, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 02, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

D E R Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 23rd January, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2015-16. 1 Subodh Kumar Singh 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

SANJU SINHA,PATNA vs. ITO WARD- 6 (1), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Dr. Manish Borad, Am Sanju Sinha, Ito, Ward 6(1) Khajpura, B. V College, Patna-800 001 Khajpura, Patna-800014, Vs. Bihar Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Apkps0784A Assessee By : Shri Prasoon Kr., Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2024

D E R PER DR. MANISH BORAD, AM: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)] dated 27th March, 2023, which is arising out of the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 26th December

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. M/S TAKSHILA EDUCATIONAL SOCITY, NEW DELHI

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

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of Revenue against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income 1 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 M/s. Takshila Educational Society Tax (Appeals), Patna-3 dated 01.01.2021 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Revenue has taken four grounds of appeal alongwith sub-grounds

PRAMOD KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO WARD- 6(5), PATNA

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

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

D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member:- This appeal at the instance of assessee for assessment year 2013-14 is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 21.02.2023, 1 A.Y. 2013-2014 Pramod Kumar which is arising out of the order under section