MANOJ KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 4(4), PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

section 46 of the RFCTLARR Act says otherwise but the assessee unable to produce the requisite documents to justify the exemption as claimed by the assessee in his submission and grounds of appeal taken to the assessee. The ld. Counsel is also unable to demonstrate that the circular issued by the CBDT noted supra is squarely applicable 9. Considering

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

In the result, the appeal of revenue-ITA No

36 Dt.2S.10.2016 of CBDT and decided -that the case of the Appellant/Assessee is covered under Section 10(37) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as acquired landed property was agriculture land besides application of Section 96 of the RFCTLAAR Act, 2013 as referred in the said Circular No.36. 3. For that the Second ground of appeal is contrary in itself

SHRI KANT MISHRA,BUXAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), BUXAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Shri Kant Mishra Income Tax Officer Maha Laxmi Steel Ward-1(5) Vs. Station Road, Buxar-802101 Buxar, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0714N Brij Kumar Mishra Plot No. 36, Gajadhar Ganj, Ram Ito, Ward-1(5) Bagh, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Afipm0712L Ajeet Kumar Mishra Ito, Ward-1(5) Buxar, Bihar, 802101 Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0713M Arun Kumar Mishra Opp. Mahatma Gandhi Magar, Ito, Ward-1(5) Bazar Samity, Rambagh, Buxar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. Buxar, Bihar, 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0716Q Assessee By : Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

capital gain of ₹36,60,028/- from sale of equity shares. The learned PCIT further noted that no documents or relevant papers were found /placed in the assessment records in respect of sale and purchase of the said shares. The learned PCIT noted that during the assessment proceedings, the learned AO has not called for the supporting evidences and papers

AJEET KUMAR MISHRA,BUXAR vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Shri Kant Mishra Income Tax Officer Maha Laxmi Steel Ward-1(5) Vs. Station Road, Buxar-802101 Buxar, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0714N Brij Kumar Mishra Plot No. 36, Gajadhar Ganj, Ram Ito, Ward-1(5) Bagh, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Afipm0712L Ajeet Kumar Mishra Ito, Ward-1(5) Buxar, Bihar, 802101 Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0713M Arun Kumar Mishra Opp. Mahatma Gandhi Magar, Ito, Ward-1(5) Bazar Samity, Rambagh, Buxar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. Buxar, Bihar, 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0716Q Assessee By : Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

capital gain of ₹36,60,028/- from sale of equity shares. The learned PCIT further noted that no documents or relevant papers were found /placed in the assessment records in respect of sale and purchase of the said shares. The learned PCIT noted that during the assessment proceedings, the learned AO has not called for the supporting evidences and papers

BRIJ KUMAR MISHRA,BUXAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), BUXAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Shri Kant Mishra Income Tax Officer Maha Laxmi Steel Ward-1(5) Vs. Station Road, Buxar-802101 Buxar, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0714N Brij Kumar Mishra Plot No. 36, Gajadhar Ganj, Ram Ito, Ward-1(5) Bagh, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Afipm0712L Ajeet Kumar Mishra Ito, Ward-1(5) Buxar, Bihar, 802101 Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0713M Arun Kumar Mishra Opp. Mahatma Gandhi Magar, Ito, Ward-1(5) Bazar Samity, Rambagh, Buxar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. Buxar, Bihar, 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0716Q Assessee By : Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

capital gain of ₹36,60,028/- from sale of equity shares. The learned PCIT further noted that no documents or relevant papers were found /placed in the assessment records in respect of sale and purchase of the said shares. The learned PCIT noted that during the assessment proceedings, the learned AO has not called for the supporting evidences and papers

ARUN KUMAR MISHRA,BUXAR vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Shri Kant Mishra Income Tax Officer Maha Laxmi Steel Ward-1(5) Vs. Station Road, Buxar-802101 Buxar, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0714N Brij Kumar Mishra Plot No. 36, Gajadhar Ganj, Ram Ito, Ward-1(5) Bagh, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Afipm0712L Ajeet Kumar Mishra Ito, Ward-1(5) Buxar, Bihar, 802101 Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0713M Arun Kumar Mishra Opp. Mahatma Gandhi Magar, Ito, Ward-1(5) Bazar Samity, Rambagh, Buxar, Buxar, Buxar, Bihar Vs. Buxar, Bihar, 802101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afipm0716Q Assessee By : Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

capital gain of ₹36,60,028/- from sale of equity shares. The learned PCIT further noted that no documents or relevant papers were found /placed in the assessment records in respect of sale and purchase of the said shares. The learned PCIT noted that during the assessment proceedings, the learned AO has not called for the supporting evidences and papers

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

section 50C of the act when the consideration for transfer of property was indeterminate. (v) That the Id CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi erred in determining the consideration for transfer of the basis of notional figure. (vi) The Id CIT(A], NFAC, Delhi erred in computing the capital gain on the basis of such notional value as determined

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.

capital gain. 9. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in upholding addition of Rs.2,05,609/-being the difference between cost of acquisition of the property as per Rol amounting to Rs. 14.42 lakhs vis-a-vis Rs. 12,36,730/- without appreciating the fact that the claim of Rs.12.36 lakhs as per circle rate of F.Y.2001-02

PRABHU DAYAL BHARTIYA ,PATNA vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-4, PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.372/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Prabhu Dayal Bhartiya (Huf)….………. …………………....Appellant 701, Shanti Kunj, Chajjubagh, Patna, Bihar- 800001.. [Pan: Aachp7738Q] Vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-4, Patna…....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 15, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Is Directed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.07.2025 Passed By The Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, A Hindu Undivided Family (Huf), Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013– 14 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹6,120/-. The Case Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing That The Assessee Was A Beneficiary Of Accommodation Entries In The Form Of Long-Term Capital Gains (Ltcg) From The Sale Of Shares Amounting To ₹55,16,804/- Received From M/S. Aayan Commercial Pvt. Ltd. & Its Associate Concerns. It

Capital Gains (LTCG) from the sale of shares amounting to ₹55,16,804/- received from M/s. Aayan Commercial Pvt. Ltd. and its associate concerns. It I.T.A. No.372/Pat/2025 Prabhu Dayal Bhartiya (HUF) was further reported that the assessee had claimed exemption of ₹36,95,540/- under section

ALOK KUMAR,MADHEPURA vs. ITO WARD 3(5), SAHARSA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraalok Kumar, Ito Ward-3(5), S/O Sri Dasrath Mehata, Saharsha Village- Ganeshpur, M.S. Vs Yogiraj, Purani Madhepura, Dist- Madhepura – 852116 (Bihar) (Pan: Bpkpk1186D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : K.P. Jalan, Ar Respondent By : Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 14.05.2024. 2 Alok Kumar, Ay: 2012-13 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

36,810.00. 02. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing order dismissing the appeal without merit and without affording proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant and had violated the principles of equity, natural justice and fair play which requires proper and adequate opportunity of being heard. 03. For that the appellant is working as govt

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital gains but is a business transaction. The counter party are the same and the Ld. AO is only taking the loss and not the profit but the profit is higher than the loss. It was stated that the net profit of ₹14,79,589/- is already accounted for. The assessee traded in Jute, Copper, Aluminium, Nickel and Zinc

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

36 read as under: “1. The Learned CIT(A) has also passed the order in ad hoc manner without going in details of our submission. The Learned ACIT (NFAC) has been pleased to complete the Assessment on u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 by making addition of Rs.1,06,23,768/- mere conjecturers & Surmises. The Appellant is seriously aggrieved with the order