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]

96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice u/s 148 besides the alleged addition of Capital Gains

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]

96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice u/s 148 besides the alleged addition of Capital Gains

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]

96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice u/s 148 besides the alleged addition of Capital Gains

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]

96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice u/s 148 besides the alleged addition of Capital Gains

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]

96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice u/s 148 besides the alleged addition of Capital Gains

RENU DEVI,PATNA vs. ITO, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 672/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Renu Devi,……………………………....….………Appellant D/79, P.C. Colony, Lohia Nagar, Kankarbagh, Patna-800020, Bihar [Pan:Algpd4522P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………...…….Respondent Ward-6(2), Patna Appearances By: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 24, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

section s147, 148,143(2) and 142 (1) of income tax act 1961 to the appellant-assessee in respect of escaped income for capital gain accrued on account of Joint Development Agreement (hereinafter referred as JDA) entered with Aparna Architect and Engicons Pvt Ltd, Patna. As per the JDA, the appellant-assessee was supposed to hand over possession of vacant

HARIHAR PRASAD,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 4 (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 gain and levy of income tax is bad and illegal because the land was acquired by the State of Bihar for public purpose for construction of road, as such, the provision of Right to Fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition rehabilitation and resettlement Act is apply and the appellant was entitle to get exemption under section 96

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

In the result, the appeal of revenue-ITA No

capital gains in the hands of the assessee is unjustified. In the present case there is clear provision of the RFCTILAAR Act, clarified that compensation received in respect of award or agreement which has been exempted from levy of income tax vide section 96

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gains\ncomputed in the hands of the assessee.\n35. In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed.\n5.2. The said order of the co-ordinate bench has been affirmed by the\nHon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of\nIncome Tax vs. Fardeen Khan [2018] 96 taxmann.com 398\n(Bombay) [2019] 411 ITR 533 (Bombay

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

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

capital gains\ncomputed in the hands of the assessee.\n35. In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed.\n2.3. The said order of the co-ordinate bench has been affirmed by the\nHon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of\nIncome Tax vs. Fardeen Khan [2018] 96 taxmann.com 398 (Bombay)\n[2019] 411 ITR 533 (Bombay

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)

capital gains, the appellant ought to have submitted the copy of Purchase Deed for investment in agricultural land to claim exemption under Sec.548. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee except the above documents did not file any other evidences in support of his claim and he also did not file to prove of deposit in CGAS account

VIBHUTI BHUSHAN SINHA,DWARKA vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), PATNA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.02/Pat/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Vibhuti Bhushan Sinha………………………….....…...……………....Appellant C-601, Shivam Apartment, Virmeshwar Nagar, Dwarka, Gujrat-361335. [Pan: Aigps7118D] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Patna…..….................................................…..…..... Respondent I.T.A. No.03/Pat/2022 Assessment Years: 2016-17 Sonam Raj…………..………………………….....…...……………....Appellant W/O Shri Deepak Verma, 2Nd Floor, House No.101, Pocket-52, Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi – 110019. [Pan: Dfsps6397E] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Patna…..….................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sushil Kr. Mishra, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 28, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 12, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By Two Different Assessees Against The Separate Orders Dated 30.04.2021 & 01.03.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To

capital gain is that appellant must have acquire right to receive the income. For that there must be debt owed to him by somebody. Both the authorities failed to appreciate that income tax is a levy on actual income but not hypothetical income. It is a fact that Income Tax Act taxed income in two points of time at which

SONAM RAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), PATNA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.02/Pat/2022 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Vibhuti Bhushan Sinha………………………….....…...……………....Appellant C-601, Shivam Apartment, Virmeshwar Nagar, Dwarka, Gujrat-361335. [Pan: Aigps7118D] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Patna…..….................................................…..…..... Respondent I.T.A. No.03/Pat/2022 Assessment Years: 2016-17 Sonam Raj…………..………………………….....…...……………....Appellant W/O Shri Deepak Verma, 2Nd Floor, House No.101, Pocket-52, Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi – 110019. [Pan: Dfsps6397E] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Patna…..….................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sushil Kr. Mishra, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 28, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 12, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By Two Different Assessees Against The Separate Orders Dated 30.04.2021 & 01.03.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To

capital gain is that appellant must have acquire right to receive the income. For that there must be debt owed to him by somebody. Both the authorities failed to appreciate that income tax is a levy on actual income but not hypothetical income. It is a fact that Income Tax Act taxed income in two points of time at which

ASHA DEVI L/H OF LATE GYAN CHAND PRASAD,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

96 is not available when a land is purchased through private negotiations by a person other than a specified person under Section 46(1). The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ("New Act of 2013") came into force from January, 2014 repealing the erstwhile Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ("LA Act 1894"). Section

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

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

96,000 on account of undisclosed investment in land under 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

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

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

96,530/- after disallowing a sum of ₹1,04,90,377/- on account of commodity trading loss. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition of ₹1,04,90,377/- made by the Ld. AO. I.T.A. No.: 108/PAT/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Sun Comtech Pvt. Ltd. Aggrieved with

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

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 08-07-2008 SBI-347 735727 6,1 1,600/- Vinod Chandra 14-07-2008 Dena-285 975914 1,47,000/- Vinod Kumar 20-11-2008 PNB-9926 797772 2,00,000/- TOTAL