G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

delay is condoned and we proceed to decide the appeals on merit. 6 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society 8. The assessee has filed application for permission to raise additional grounds of appeal. The assessee has sought to raise two additional grounds of appeal in each year. The application of the assessee reads as under

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

delay is condoned and we proceed to decide the appeals on merit. 6 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society 8. The assessee has filed application for permission to raise additional grounds of appeal. The assessee has sought to raise two additional grounds of appeal in each year. The application of the assessee reads as under

RAJ KISHORE UPADHYAY,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, SIWAN, SIWAN

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

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

10 days time to prepare memo of appeal. That the delay has been caused due to compelling circumstances and there was no intention of the assessee to make delay. Under the above, there is a delay of 178 days and this delay has been caused due to unavoidable circumstances which was beyond the control of assessee. The Hon'ble Apex

SANJAY KUMAR,UJJAIN vs. DC/AC, CIRCLE-1, 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. 696/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Sanjay Kumar,………………………….……..……Appellant B-20/19, Ved Nagar, Indore Road, Nanakheda, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh-456010, India [Pan:Amgpk0372B] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner /Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…………….………...……...Respondent Circle-1, Patna Appearances By: Shri Ashish Kr. Agrawal, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: March 10, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: March 20, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 showing total income of Rs.18,63,160/-. The case was reopened to examine the fresh unsecured loan amounting to Rs.24,60,328/- introduced during the A.Y. 2011-12. The required approval

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

10. At the outset, it is submitted that the various observations, which have been made by the A.O. for making addition are based purely on surmises, conjectures and personal presumptions as well as without proper verification/consideration of material and details available on record. That apart, the facts and basis on which the said observations have been made are itself based

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

10. At the outset, it is submitted that the various observations, which have been made by the A.O. for making addition are based purely on surmises, conjectures and personal presumptions as well as without proper verification/consideration of material and details available on record. That apart, the facts and basis on which the said observations have been made are itself based

SHARDINDU PRASAD SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), 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 and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 630/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shardindu Prasad Singh. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal, which are argumentative: “A. For that, on the fact and circumstances of the case, this 2nd appeal arises against an arbitrary, baseless, hypothetical and presumptive incomplete

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

delay is condoned. [Para 8]” 013. We also note that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Ultimate Infratech Private Limited Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre in WP 6305/2022 dated 20th April, 2022, dealing with similar issue has held as under: - “5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is only

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

delay is condoned. [Para 8]” 013. We also note that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Ultimate Infratech Private Limited Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre in WP 6305/2022 dated 20th April, 2022, dealing with similar issue has held as under: - “5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is only

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

delay is condoned. [Para 8]” 013. We also note that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Ultimate Infratech Private Limited Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre in WP 6305/2022 dated 20th April, 2022, dealing with similar issue has held as under: - “5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is only

NAND KUMAR PRASAD SAH,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

delay is condoned. [Para 8]” 013. We also note that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Ultimate Infratech Private Limited Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre in WP 6305/2022 dated 20th April, 2022, dealing with similar issue has held as under: - “5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is only

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

delay is condoned. [Para 8]” 013. We also note that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Ultimate Infratech Private Limited Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre in WP 6305/2022 dated 20th April, 2022, dealing with similar issue has held as under: - “5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is only

NAND KUMAR PRASAD SAH,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

delay is condoned. [Para 8]” 013. We also note that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Ultimate Infratech Private Limited Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre in WP 6305/2022 dated 20th April, 2022, dealing with similar issue has held as under: - “5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is only

VIVEK KUMAR RANA,PATNA vs. ASSESSEMENT UNIT, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 115/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Vivek Kumar Rana,…….……….………..………Appellant 101, Artak Apartment, Ashiana Road, B.V. College, S.O. Rukanpura, Patna-800014, Bihar [Pan:Adhpr8630D] -Vs.- Assessment Unit, Delhi,………………….…....Respondent Ito/Nfac, Delhi Appearances By: Shri Manish Sinha, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an Individual and was reported to be a non-filer. Information was received from Insight portal which suggested that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for the relevant assessment year. The assessee sold immovable property valued at Rs.84,23,000/-, received interest on securities amounting

SHIVENDU SHEKHAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD6(5), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 on 31.12.2017 showing an income of 2 Shivendu Shekhar Singh Rs.3,54,480/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served upon

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

condone the delay of 25 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. That the Hon'ble PCIT, Patna erred in appreciating the facts properly. 2. That the Hon'ble PCIT erred in treating the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

condone the delay of 25 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. That the Hon'ble PCIT, Patna erred in appreciating the facts properly. 2. That the Hon'ble PCIT erred in treating the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer

PANCHAM PAL,PATNA vs. I.T.O, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 7/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Pancham Pal. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal and upholding the order passed by the A.O. 2. For that