MEENA GUPTA,PATNA, BIHAR vs. ITO, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 506/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 & S.A. No. 15/Pat/2025 (In Ita No. 506/Pat/2025) Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Meena Gupta,……………...……………..……..Appellant House No. 9/N3, Road No. 11, Rajendra Nagar, Rajendra Nagar S.O., (Patna), Sampatchak, Patna-800016, Bihar [Pan:Addpg7557N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-5(1), Patna, Lok Nayak Jaiprakash Bhawan, Dakbunglow Chauraha, Patna-800001, Bihar

condonation of the delay in filing of the appeal as well as negligent attitude on the part of the appellant. The ld. D.R. pleaded to uphold the order of ld. CIT(Appeals). 10. We have perused the material available on record. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in order to ensure the principle

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

nature. The assessee has taken sixteen grounds. However, his grievances revolve around two-folds, namely- (a) ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in not 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

VASUNDHARA VIHAR CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), KATIHAR

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

order of CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice by dismissing the appeal in limine without condoning delay."}}} oning the delay."}}}

GRAM NIRMAN MANDAL,NAWADA vs. DC/AC EXEMPTION, CIR, PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay, holding that assessee should not be punished for the mistake of his consultant In case of C.I.T vs A.C.I.T (2011) THE Bombay High Court held that the taxpayers cannot penalized Solely because of procedural mistake provided the taxpayers acted in good faith. The supreme court of India has also laid down principles of natural justice

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

condone the delay in filing the application u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act in the interest of natural justice

MANOJ KUMAR YADAV,SIWAN vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), SIWAN

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

nature and source of cash deposited total amount at Rs. 10,00,000/- in his bank account during the demonetization period, and therefore the same is hereby added in return of income of the assessee and charged to income tax as unexplained money u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE trading undisclosed income under the head of other sources of the previous year

K.B. TECHNIC PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. DC/ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

condoned the delay as the reasons provided were genuine and bonafide, and the Department did not object. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was passed without considering the assessee's reply and was in violation of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, thus lacking natural justice

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

natural justice. 17. That Penalty proceeding u/s 271AAC is also initiated as the income determined includes income referred u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act,’61. As the entire source is explain hence no penalty proceeding has no legal legs to stand in court of law. 18. That the Ld. NFAC has allowed the similar case

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

natural justice. 17. That Penalty proceeding u/s 271AAC is also initiated as the income determined includes income referred u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act,’61. As the entire source is explain hence no penalty proceeding has no legal legs to stand in court of law. 18. That the Ld. NFAC has allowed the similar case

ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRABHAT,ARRAH vs. PCIT-1, PATNA

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. 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 Id. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Patna, is bad both

PANKAJ KUMAR (HUF),RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD- 3(1), GAYA

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

condoned the delay of 189 days, finding it to be due to a reasonable cause and not a deliberate attempt to delay. The Tribunal observed that the order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee, thus lacking natural justice

PATNA SMART CITY LIMITED,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PTN-W-(21)(91), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

natural justice. The Hon'ble High Court directed the assessee to file the appeal subject to acceptance of limitation. It was submitted that the assessee is a nascent company and the case was given to a nascent Chartered Accountant who could not handle the matter properly. It was requested that the matter may be remand to the Ld. AO, subject

AJAY KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (3), PATNA, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

natural justice kindly condone the delay for filing of appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal so, that appellant case

NORTH BIHAR CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3, DARBHANGA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 243/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 North Bihar Construction Pvt. Limited,………Appellant Singh Sadan, Veer Kunwar Singh Path, Danapur Cantt., Patna-801503, Bihar [Pan:Aabcn9870B] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.…...Respondent Circle-3, Darbhanga Darbhanga-846001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Pankaj Jyoti, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ajay Kr. Shukla, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 13, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, which is engaged in the business of construction. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 declaring total income at Rs.27,46,090/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny for the reason that there

RAJESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (2), GAYA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A)NFAC Delhi has erred in sustaining the order of the A.O. and thereby affirmed the order made by the A.O. amounting to Rs. 14,20,370/-. 2. For that

CHANDRA DEEP KUMAR,VAISHALI vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (1), VAISHALI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Am Chandra Deep Kumar Income Tax Officer, Koahi Patepur, Mahua, Vaishali, Hajipur, Patna-803101,Bihar Vs. Bihar-843114, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bfjpk2736N Assessee By : S/Shri Kn Prasad & Vishal Kr., Ars Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.06.2025

condone the delay in filing the appeal. The appeal will now be heard on merits. 05. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Act was without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee and as such the order is bereft of natural justice

MOHAMMAD SADDIQUE ALI,KATIHAR vs. NFAC, KATIHAR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 518/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Mohammad Saddique Ali,……………….…………Appellant [Legal Heir – Tanjul Haque], Raniganj, Sonauli, Kadwa, Katihar-854105, Bihar [Pan:Apcpa4371H] -Vs.- Assessment Unit,…………………………………...Respondent Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi 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: April 29, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 04, 2025 O R D E R

condonation petition mentioning the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice

SAVITRI DEVI,BHOJPUR vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

natural justice?” 2.1 The assessee has also modified the grounds of appeal, which are as under and are accordingly taken up for adjudication: “1. That the appellant raised altogether 8 grounds for filing the appeal for the redressal of her grievance. 2. That out of 8 grounds, some grounds were felt superfluous by the Hon'ble chairman and hence