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

condone the delay in filing Form 10B.\n\n5.3 As regard appellant's appeal against taxing the entire receipts instead\nof taxing the income over expenditure, it is stated that facts involved in the\nissue is that the appellant had disclosed gross receipts of Rs.1,27,76,341/-\nin the ITR and claimed expenses

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

5 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society the delay was occasioned by the party deliberately to gain time then the court should lean against acceptance of the explanation. While condoning delay the Could should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would

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

5 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society the delay was occasioned by the party deliberately to gain time then the court should lean against acceptance of the explanation. While condoning delay the Could should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would

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

5 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society the delay was occasioned by the party deliberately to gain time then the court should lean against acceptance of the explanation. While condoning delay the Could should not forget the opposite party altogether. It must be borne in mind that he is a looser and he too would

M/S GEETANJALI ESTATE PVT LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi lain Vs. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575] and State of West Bengal Vs. The Administrator, Howrah Municipality [AIR 1972 SC 749]. It must be remembered that in every case of 8 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 M/s. Geetanjali Estate

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 of form no 10B. 4) For that, as per record delay of 1260 days and due to this reason, petition was rejected by authority 5) For that, in this year assessee has filed form no 10B electronically on 13/04/2022 6) For that, due to unavailability of electronically filed 10B, during assessment process, Ld. A.O. has disallowed every

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

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 Appearances by: Shri Ankit Kumar, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Manab Adak, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: February

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

11. For that other various reasons which may be as under time of hearing” 3. Brief facts of the case as per the Statement of Facts filed before the Tribunal are that the assessee is a Government Company as defined under Section 2(45) of the Companies Act, 2013 and is set up by the State Government of Bihar with

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION CIRCLE PATNA, PATNA vs. CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NAYAY NAGAR

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.342/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Acit(Exemption), Patna..........................................................……….……Appellant Vs. Chanakya National Law University, Nayay Nagar.............……...…..…..Respondent Mithapur, Patna, Bihar – 800001. [Pan: Aaajc0528M] Appearances By: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri A. K. Rastogi, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 21, 2024 Order Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 07.02.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 1.1 In This Case, There Were Primarily Two Issues Which Were Before The Assessing Officer, Namely, The Issue Of Delayed Filing Of Form 10 Which Was Required U/S 11(2) R.W.S. 13(9) Of The Act & Secondly, The Issue Of An Amount Of Rs.3,58,00,000/- Which Was Added As Technically Being A Receipt Which Had Not Been Offered For Tax By The Assessee. Needless To Say, The Amount Of Rs.3,58,00,000/- Was Added & The Benefit Of Carry Forward Of Surplus Income Was Denied Since The Form 10 Was Not Filed In Time. 2. This Matter Was Carried In Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) & There The Issue Of Rs.3,58,00,000/- Was Allowed As Relief On The Ground That The Impugned Amount Was Apparently Debited Internally & Shown As

section 11(2) by the Assessing Officer is hereby confirmed.” 5.2 We support this action in as much as that the CBDT has its powers u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act to condone the delay and in case, the said action is done then the assessee would get consequential benefits u/s 11(2) r.w.s

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 hears the appeal on merits.” 5. Rival contentions were heard and the record and the submissions made have been examined. Both before the Ld. AO as well as before the I.T.A. No.: 171/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar. Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not be represented properly and the Ld. AR requested that

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

11. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should be made, your appellant submits that the learned AO ought to have considered and accepted the fact that disclosures has been made and taxes has been deposited by issuing letter to Ld. AO prior to the passing of order. 12. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should

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

11. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should be made, your appellant submits that the learned AO ought to have considered and accepted the fact that disclosures has been made and taxes has been deposited by issuing letter to Ld. AO prior to the passing of order. 12. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should

SAROJ DEVI,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

11. That the appellant submits that the delay in filing of the is due to a reasonable cause. The appellant submits that the delay in filing of the present appeal be condoned and the appeal be heard on merits. Under the facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, prayed that the delay in filing appeal before this Hon'ble Court

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

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

11 and 10(23C)(iad) for the AY 2017-18, though confirmed the denial of exemption under these sections by the AO, without appreciating the positions of law before the insertion of section 13(10) and the relevant proviso of section 10(23C) which are effective only from 01.04.2023.” 2. Before us, right at the outset, the Ld. DR pointed

ANIL KUMAR,WEST CHAMPARAN vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), BETTIAH

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit both the appeals for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 261/PAT/2025: “1. For that the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [the NFAC] erred on facts and in law in partly allowing the appeal filed by the assessee, vide order passed under section

ANIL KUMAR,WEST CHAMPARAN vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), BETTIAH

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit both the appeals for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 261/PAT/2025: “1. For that the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [the NFAC] erred on facts and in law in partly allowing the appeal filed by the assessee, vide order passed under section