SARVAJANIK EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY,GUGULDIH vs. COMMISSIONER OF IMCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condoned. 7. We have considered the submissions made. The application for final approval was rejected mainly because of the delay in filing Form No. 10AB for regular registration. Since the assessee is a villager and the provisions were newly introduced; there was sufficient cause for the delay. The Bench was of the view that the Ld. CIT (Exemption

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

condoning the delay and deciding the appeal on merit. (b) Whether capital gain on compensation received by the assessee for compulsory acquisition of agricultural land is leviable in his hands or not. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed his return of income electronically on 15.09.2016 declaring total income of Rs.2,53,190/-.The assessee

ARJUN KUMAR SAH,VAISHALI vs. ITO WARD- 1(3), VAISHALI

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

exemption limit. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as ld. 'AO') completed the assessment order u/s 144A of the Act and assessed the income of Rs. 85,81,397/- on account of cash deposit in the Indusind Bank during the demonetization period and cash deposited in Indusind Bank of Rs. 75,78,167/- other than demonetization as an unexplained money

PARTH SARTHI BALY SHILPI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,VAISHALI, HAJIPUR vs. CPC, BENGALORE

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

exemption u/s 12A on\nthe ground that there was delay in filing of form-10B.\n2. That CBDT has issued a circular bearing no-16/2024 dated-18/11/2024,\naccording to which the delay in filing of audit report in form-10B can be condoned

SHASHI KRISHNA EDUCATIONAL AVAM WELFARE SOCIETY,PATNA vs. AO, PATNA

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

delay in filing of such\nForm, the same should be got condoned by the concerned jurisdictional\nCommissioner of Income Tax u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. In the present case,\nthere is no evidence on record that the appellant filed any such condonation\npetition before the Commissioner. CPC was therefore justified in disallowing\nthe exemption

DHARMENDRA KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 4(2), 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. 709/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Dharmendra Kumar,…………………...….………Appellant E/74, Krishna Building, Patliputra Road, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Anppk4627D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………...…….Respondent Ward-4(2), Patna, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, 4Th Floor, Dak Bunglow Chowk, Patna-800001, Bihar

condonation of delay of 336 days mentioning that the delay occurred due to spread of pandemic of novel coronavirus and following lockdown announced by our Hon’ble Prime Minister in filing of the appeal for the period falling before COVID exempt

BIHAR STATE EDUCATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORP. LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the order of the ld. Assessing Officer as well as the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal

AMAR NATH SINGH,ARA vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: The Itat. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Given Explanation Which Is As Under:

condone the delay and the appeal is taking for adjudication. 3 Amar Nath Singh 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 04.01.2018 declaring total income at Rs. 5,03,010/- as per information with the income tax department. The assessee had deposited cash in his bank account maintained at Punjab

ANUP KUMAR HUF,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, PATNA, 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. 192/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Anup Kumar Huf,…………………...….………Appellant 4A, Narayan Nilayam Apartment, Road No. 6 Rajendra Nagar, Patna-800016 Bihar [Pan:Aahha5422R] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax....Respondent Central Circle-1, Patna

delay is condoned. 4. The facts in brief are that a survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were carried out at the business premises of M/s. Sona Gold Agrochem Pvt. Ltd., Patna. The group consisted of a number of companies which are in the business of manufacturer of poultry feed and rice. The group of concerns

MINTU RANI,PATNA vs. ASSESSEMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 16/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mintu Rani. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, ['the NFAC] erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant, vide

NAVRAS SCHOOL OF PERFORMING ARTS,PATNA vs. CIT(E)PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Exemption), Patna rejecting the\napplication of the assessee-trust for registration u/s 12A of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as the “Act”].\n2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing of\nthe matter and neither any application seeking adjournment has been\nfiled. From the records, it appears that in many occasions

ROSE BUD MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATNA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD-1, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

delay is, therefore, condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:- 1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the order of the learned assessing officer and also the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is bad both

SWARGIYA PROF NAWAL PD. SINGH S SANSTHAN,VAISHALI vs. CPC, BENGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.348/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Swargiya Prof Nawal Pd. Singh S Sansthan…………………..………. …………………....Appellant 0 Sahi Colony, Hajipur, Vaishali, Bihar- 844101.. [Pan: Aagts5236E] Vs. Cpc, Bengaluru……..…....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rakesh Kumar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 21, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Is Directed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 03.01.2025 Passed By The Cit, Appeal Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Chennai Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018–19. The Case Was Processed By The Cpc, Which Issued An Intimation Under Section 143(1) Of The Act, Disallowing The Assessee’S Claim Of Exemption Of ₹1,25,99,176, Being 80% Of The Total Expenditure Against Total Receipts Of ₹1,27,78,294. Consequently, The Total Income Was Determined At ₹₹1,27,78,294. I.T.A. No.348/Pat/2025 Swargiya Prof Nawal Pd. Singh S Sansthan 3. Aggrieved By The Above Intimation, The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Cit(A). However, The Cit(A) Dismissed The Appeal Solely On The Ground That It Was Filed After A Delay Of 1,489 Days, Without Considering The Matter On Merits.

exemption of ₹1,25,99,176, being 80% of the total expenditure against total receipts of ₹1,27,78,294. Consequently, the total income was determined at ₹₹1,27,78,294. I.T.A. No.348/Pat/2025 Swargiya Prof Nawal Pd. Singh S Sansthan 3. Aggrieved by the above intimation, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) dismissed

NEXGENHUMAN,PATNA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Exemption),Patna (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 28.08.2023 for AY 2023-24. 2 I.T.A. No. 259/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Nexgenhuman 2. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 116 days for this the assessee has filed condonation

SUNITA AGRAWAL,KOLKATA vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on this issue

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee, Smt. Sunita Agarwal, is the wife of Shri Anil Agarwal, filed her return of income for AY 2015-16 on 02.02.2016 declared total income of Rs. 3,58,580/-. The case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act after recording reasons of reopening

DEEPAK SHRAWAN BUDHIA,MUMBAI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF I.T., PATNA-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

exemption provisions. 5. For that, the order was passed without considering that no single payment above Rs. 30,000/-or total payment exceeding Rs. 1,00,000/- was paid to a single party during FY 2017-18 other than two parties which have also submitted declaration for non deduction of TDS. 6. For that, the order was passed with

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

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

delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication. 1.1 This is a batch of three appeals having additions made on same issue for all the three years under consideration. Accordingly, these three matters are being disposed of by a single order. For the sake of convenience, the appeal

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

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

delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication. 1.1 This is a batch of three appeals having additions made on same issue for all the three years under consideration. Accordingly, these three matters are being disposed of by a single order. For the sake of convenience, the appeal