RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

delay is hereby condoned and the matter is admitted for adjudication. 2. It is noticed that this is an appeal filed on 31.12.2020 and has gone through 10 days of hearing beginning from 02.11.2022 to the last one being on 01.01.2025. It is seen that either adjournments have been taken by the Ld. AR or none have attended on certain

PUSHPA KUMARI,MUZAFFARPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No.08/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Pushpa Kumari ………. Appellant Pawapuri Bihar, N.H. 28, Bhagwanpur, Muzaffarpur, Bihar-842001. (Pan: Abgpk2480B)

condone the delay and admit it for adjudication. When the case was called for hearing, neither any one appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any adjournment application. On perusal of the records, it was noticed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is ex parte and, therefore, it was deemed fit to adjudicate the appeal with

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee are:- (a) in ITA No. 48/Pat/2020: 1. For that the appellate order passed u/s. 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. For that the ld. CIT(appeals) has not been justified in confirming the order passed

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee are:- (a) in ITA No. 48/Pat/2020: 1. For that the appellate order passed u/s. 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. For that the ld. CIT(appeals) has not been justified in confirming the order passed

MOTOR MACHINERUY TOOLS,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)]

delay of 49 days is accordingly condoned and the appeal of the assessee is being disposed off on merit. 3. The issue raised in ground no. 1 relates to the addition of Rs.4,08,200/- made by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter the ‘AO’) and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) u/s 28(iv) of the Act being the amount

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

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation is not in respect of an asset, acquisition of which has been claimed as application of income, in the same or any other previous year; and (d) such expenditure is not in the form of any contribution or donation to any person. Explanation.—For the purposes of determining the amount of expenditure under this sub-section, the provisions

NORTH BIHAR POWER DISTRUBUTION CO. LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

condone the delay and proceed to admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The assessee has taken four grounds of appeal which are reproduced as under: “1. Ground 1: The learned PCIT has erred in law, for issuance of notice [DIN & Notice No: ITBA/REV/F/REV1/2021-22/1 038620636(1) Dated 11/01/2022, attachment thereon] and passed order [DIN & Order No: ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2021- 22/1042288650(1) dated 31/03/2022