KRIPA SHANKER,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital gains was chargeable as per the provisions of section 54F of the Act. As regards the delay in filing the appeal, it was submitted that the assessee was not aware that the appeal order had been passed. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the appellate authority and requested that the same may be confirmed. 6. We have

SAROJ DEVI,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital gains at ₹81,66,750/-, which was added to the total income as per the return shown at ₹1,60,000/- and the total income was assessed at ₹83,26,750/-. 4. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued several notices of hearing to the assessee and since there

ALOK KUMAR,ARRAH vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), ARRAH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

capital gain under section 48 of the Income Tax Act, the full value of the property would be construed at Rs.150/-. This deeming fiction is provided in section 50C of the Income Tax Act. The ld. Assessing Officer made a reference to section 50C and observed that full value of sale consideration is being taken at Rs.1,69

RAJ KUMAR SINGH ,PATNA vs. ITO,WARD-6(4),PATNA , PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

capital gains was assessed. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution as the assessee failed to comply with 7 notices issued for hearing nor the assessee attempted to file any documents, evidences and explanation in support of the grounds of appeal

KIRAN JAISWAL,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 4(5), PATNA

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

Section 69 of the Act merely on the ground that the appellant has failed to explain the said investment notwithstanding the fact that the same were made out of sale proceeds of another land and were long-term capital gains

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Capital Gain on sale of immovable property and the total income was computed at ₹4,62,56,388 /-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued several notices and though it is mentioned in the appeal order at page 4 that the assessee was issued a final show cause notice

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:

capital gains arising on sale of land worth ₹1,66,07,000/- as the assessee was found to have sold 2 pieces of land and a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. In pursuance to the notice u/s 148 dt. 25.03.2019, the assessee had filed ITR-2 on 25.05.2019, however, it has been alleged in the assessment

DINESHWAR PRASAD,SARVADYA KAMLA APARTMENT, BORING ROAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PATNA, NOT KNOWN

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.250/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dineshwar Prasad.………………………. …………………....Appellant Sarvadya Kamla Apartment, An Path, North S K Puri, Boring Road, Patna - 800013. [Pan: Acwpp8473C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-4, Patna…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.S.P Singh, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.02.2023 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 749 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

capital gain and other source and filed his return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 by declaring a total income of Rs.8,87,760/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS and notice under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued calling for details and documents in respect of cash deposits of Rs.56

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

69,973/- for which the transactions were done during the beginning of the financial year from April, 2010 to May, 2010 with M/s. Fast Commodity Markets Ltd., the broker and in the last quarter of the financial year commodity trading losses amounting to ₹1,04,90,377/- in respect of the commodity trading done through the brokers namely M/s. Subh

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

69,000/- Omkar Kumar 05-01-2009 Dnea-285 975937 4,30,000/- R.S. Kumar 17-06-2008 SBI-347 735724 4,70,000/- Satyendra Sharma 26-03-2009 Dena-285 975985 96,000/- Subhash Kumar 31-05-2008 PNB-9926 821336 1,50,000/- Subhash Kumar 08-09-2008 PNB-9926 797767 5,00,000/- Subodh Kumar

MAHENDRA PRASAD,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, ITD, DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Gains from I.T.A. No.: 717/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mahendra Prasad. Business or Profession" and income of Rs. 5,00,466/- under the head "Income from Other Sources". The assessee had offered logistics services (transport) to the Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. in Motihari and the Bihar State Warehousing Corporation in Patna, in addition to engaging in wholesale