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

8 of 14 I.T.A. No.: 179 to 183/PAT/2023 Amar Kasera (HUF), AYs : 2011-12, 2013-14 to 2015-16 exempt from tax u/s. 10(38) of the Act. The assessment was carried out u/s. 143(3) of the Act. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer made specific queries relating to the aforesaid claim of capital gains. The assessee

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

8 of 14 I.T.A. No.: 179 to 183/PAT/2023 Amar Kasera (HUF), AYs : 2011-12, 2013-14 to 2015-16 exempt from tax u/s. 10(38) of the Act. The assessment was carried out u/s. 143(3) of the Act. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer made specific queries relating to the aforesaid claim of capital gains. The assessee

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

8 of 14 I.T.A. No.: 179 to 183/PAT/2023 Amar Kasera (HUF), AYs : 2011-12, 2013-14 to 2015-16 exempt from tax u/s. 10(38) of the Act. The assessment was carried out u/s. 143(3) of the Act. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer made specific queries relating to the aforesaid claim of capital gains. The assessee

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

8 of 14 I.T.A. No.: 179 to 183/PAT/2023 Amar Kasera (HUF), AYs : 2011-12, 2013-14 to 2015-16 exempt from tax u/s. 10(38) of the Act. The assessment was carried out u/s. 143(3) of the Act. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer made specific queries relating to the aforesaid claim of capital gains. The assessee

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, 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 6. The issue raised in ground no. 1 by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 24.02.2020 by the AO. 7. Facts in brief are that the assessment u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was framed by the AO vide order dated

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 6. The issue raised in ground no. 1 by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 24.02.2020 by the AO. 7. Facts in brief are that the assessment u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was framed by the AO vide order dated

DCIT, CIRCLE-4, 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 6. The issue raised in ground no. 1 by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 24.02.2020 by the AO. 7. Facts in brief are that the assessment u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was framed by the AO vide order dated

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 6. The issue raised in ground no. 1 by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 24.02.2020 by the AO. 7. Facts in brief are that the assessment u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was framed by the AO vide order dated

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 6. The issue raised in ground no. 1 by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 24.02.2020 by the AO. 7. Facts in brief are that the assessment u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was framed by the AO vide order dated

HARI NARAYAN GUPTA (HUF),PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (5), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

13-02-2003], however,\nthe facts are distinguishable as in that case the substantial payments\nwere made at the time of execution of joint development agreement.\nAfter hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials\navailable on record, we find that the assessee has entered into a\nLand Development Agreement with the builder as stated hereinabove\nand builder has been

VINOD YADAV,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (3), PATNA

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

13-02-2003], however, the\nfacts are distinguishable as in that case the substantial payments were\nmade at the time of execution of joint development agreement.\n2.2. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials\navailable on record, we find that the assessee has entered into a Land\nDevelopment Agreement with the builder as stated hereinabove and\nbuilder

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

13,60,000/- by invoking section 50C of the Act on account of capital gain. (7) For that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the A.O. has not made any reference to the valuation officer as per mandate of law contained in Section 50C(2). (8

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

In the result, the appeal of revenue-ITA No

8. ITA No.102/Pat/20 AY 2014-15 & CO No.01/Pat/2021 (ITA No. 102/Pat/20) AY 2014-15 Jagdish Ray Under the existing provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 an agricultural land which is not situated in specified urban area is not regarded as a capital asset. Hence, capital gain arising from the transfer (including compulsory acquisition) of such agricultural land

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

8 km. is being measured from the Notification of the Income Tax Authorities. These factors have not been looked into. The ld. Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee has claimed exemption under sections 54B and 54F, but he has not dealt with those claims. He has not granted the opportunities to the assessee for submission of these evidences

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

capital gains chargeable under section 45; (vii) the profits and gains of any business of insurance carried on by a mutual insurance company or by a co- operative society, computed in accordance with section 44 or any surplus taken to be such profits and gains by virtue of provisions contained in the First Schedule; (viia) the profits and gains

PANCHAM PAL,PATNA vs. I.T.O, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

8. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has violated the mandatory provision of law by not uploading the notices on ITBA Portal and sending the notices through email and thereby alleging non-compliance on the part of the appellant 9. For that the appellant is prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause in not making compliance resulting into ex-parte

AJAY KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (3), PATNA, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

8. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case the Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate that the Developer was to give residential flats as per the Agreement which qualifies for deduction u/s 54F of the IT Act, 1961 from deemed Long Term Capital Gains. I.T.A. No.: 392/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ajay Kumar. 9. For that

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