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

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

MOHAMMAD SOHEL ALAM,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD 3 (1), PURNEA

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

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

12, 2024 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27th October, 2023 passed for assessment year 2017-18. 1 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Mohammad Sohel Alam 2. It emerges out from

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

section 263. Therefore, this conduct shows that every time it was in the knowledge of the assessee. That such an order has been passed against it. The written submission filed by the ld. CIT (DR) indicates that there was scrutiny assessment in the first round, which was passed on 18.02.2016 when the second round of assessment order is being undertaken

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

PAPPU KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (4), PATNA

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

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

12, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : September 25, 2024 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 16th November, 2022 passed for assessment year 2014-15. 1 Assessment Year

RAHUL KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 2(2), PATNA, PATNA

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

12 days for which this application for condonation of delay has been filed along-with memorandum of appeal. 8. That delay in filing the appeal is primarily because of technical glitch on e-filing portal for which deponent cannot beheld responsible 9. It is therefore prayed that appellant prayer for granting the condonation for delay of twelve day in filing

ITO, WARD-2(1), BEGUSARAI, BEGUSARAI vs. MANISH KUMAR MOTANI, KHAGARIA, BIHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and CO of the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Ito, Ward 2(1), Begusarai Manish Kumar Motani, 3Rd Floor, G.S. Motors Building, Manish Kumar Motani, Hanuman Har Har Mahadev Chauk, Traders, Mill Road, Khagaria, Vs. Begusarai-851101, Begusarai, Khagaria, Bihari-851204 Bihar-851101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajjpm4263D Co No. 02/Pat/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 442/Pat/2024 For A.Y. 2017-18) Ito, Ward 2(1), Begusarai Manish Kumar Motani, 3Rd Floor, G.S. Motors Building, Manish Kumar Motani, Hanuman Har Har Mahadev Chauk, Traders, Mill Road, Khagaria, Vs. Begusarai-851101, Begusarai, Khagaria, Bihari-851204 Bihar-851101 (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri A.K. Rastogi, S.K. Duta, Ars Revenue By : Shri A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2026

12 days in filing the appeal by the department and in support of which a condonation petition was filed. It was stated that the delay has occurred due to obtaining the administrative approvals from the competent authorities in the tax hierarchy , which took time and accordingly, the delay may be condoned. The ld. AR, on the other hand

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

12, 54,518/- as per provision u/s 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and assessed taxed U/s 115 BBE of the Act at the rate of 60 percent.” 4. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued notices for hearing after condoning the delay but since the assessee did not respond

XAVIERS CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,PATNA vs. ITO WARD- 2 (2), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 349/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Xaviers Construction Pvt. Limited,....……Appellant House No. 239, Lodipur, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Aaacx0342D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-2(2), Patna Appearances By: Shri Anjan Biswas, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: February 13, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: March 21, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-assessee is a Private Limited Company, doing its business in developing Real Estate and engaged in civil contract work. The assessee has filed its return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 declaring total income of Rs.5,47,040/-. The case was selected for scrutiny. Accordingly

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

12. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should be made as, your appellant submits that the learned AO ought to have considered and accepted the fact in the case. 13. The issue which needs adjudication is that where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued to assessee, can the assessment be completed under

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

12. Without prejudice to our ground that no addition should be made as, your appellant submits that the learned AO ought to have considered and accepted the fact in the case. 13. The issue which needs adjudication is that where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued to assessee, can the assessment be completed under

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

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 Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the Assessment Order dated 16.12.2019 as passed u/s 143(3) read

PRABHAT KUMAR,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

Appeal is allowed\nfor statistical purposes

delay is\nhereby condoned and the matter is admitted for adjudication.\n2\nThis appeal emanates from the order dated 17.11.2023 passed by\nthe Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal\nCentre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)"] u/s 250\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act').\n2.1 In this case

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

SHANKAR,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 6 (1), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

12,81,455/- being the difference, was added to the income of the assessee under section 68 of the Act and charged to tax under section 115BBE of the Act and the total income was assessed at ₹15,85,575/-. Before the ld. CIT(Appeals), there was no explanation from the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal, therefore

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