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

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

delay in filing the appeal has not been condoned, consequently the appeal of the appellant becomes non-est and therefore the same is not admitted”. Therefore, instead of granting any stay, we deem it appropriate to hear the appeal itself along with this Stay Application. There is no objection qua this step at the end of the parties. Therefore, present

DIPAK KUMAR SINGH & SONS HUF,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2), PATNA

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee claimed that the delay was on account of ignorance of law and the assessee was alerted for filing the appeal only when they received a notice proposing levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue of delayed filing with the help of several authorities on the subject and has declined to condone the said delay due to which the appeal was dismissed. 3.1 Further aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is

147 read with section 144 of the Act. Through this order, he assessed long term capital gains of Rs. 36,76,169/-. Aggrieved with this action, the assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) but could not succeed as the Ld. CIT(A) declined to condone a delay

ATLANTIS MEDICARE PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-1, PATNA

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

condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It observed that the facts of the case needed to be established clearly and fairly at the CIT(A) level. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "143(3)", "147

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

147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant preferred appeal. 3.1 In this case, the appellant has misrepresented the facts. Vide point no 2C of the form 35 submitted by the appellant, he has claimed date of service of order/notice of demand as 16.02.2024. Appellant filed the appeal on 16.02.2024. Vide Point

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

147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant preferred appeal. 3.1 In this case, the appellant has misrepresented the facts. Vide point no 2C of the form 35 submitted by the appellant, he has claimed date of service of order/notice of demand as 16.02.2024. Appellant filed the appeal on 16.02.2024. Vide Point

PROGRESSIVE LIFE SCIENCES PVT. LTD.,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DC/AC, CIRCLE 1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 492/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Progressive Life Sciences Pvt. Limited,………Appellant Trimurti Palace, Murgi Bagicha, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Aaecp0409P] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.….Respondent Dc/Ac, Circle-1, Patna, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Dak Bangalow Road, Patna-800001, Bihar Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 5, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 27, 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 filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 declaring total income at ‘NIL’. The case of the assessee was reopened by the ld. Assessing Officer under section 147

RAM KUMAR,SUPAUL vs. ITO, 3(5), SAHARSA

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 Assessment Order as passed by the lower authorities is bad in law. No reasonable opportunity

ASHOK TIWARI,SIWAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2 (3), SIWAN

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. 28/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Ashok Tiwari,………………….……..……..………Appellant Nirala Nagar, Near Junior Sikshak Sangh, Behind Adda No. 1, Siwan, Bihar [Pan:Aecpt0627G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………….…………...Respondent Ward-2(3), Siwan, Office At Income Tax Office, Dak Bunglow Road, Siwarn-841226, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kumar Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 01, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 27, 2025 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 21.06.2013. In this case, an information received from ADIT (Inv.), Muzaffarpur, that the assessee had purchased an immovable property at a total cost of Rs.58,30,786/- from Shri Abhishek Kumar. The said information examined from ITR of the assessee

CHANDAN KUMAR,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

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. 260/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Chandan Kumar,……………..…………....……Appellant 2H/33, Near T.V. Tower, Bahadurpur, Housing Colony, Kankarbagh, Patna-800020, Bihar [Pan:Apups3760C] -Vs.- National Faceless Assessment Centre,....Respondent New Delhi Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: February 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: February 13, 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 declaring total income at Rs.11,46,000/-. In this case, the department has credible information that the assessee has made advances to various entities and made investments during F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to A.Y. 2015-16. In order

ARCHANA KUMARI,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 4(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. 15/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Archana Kumari,…………..………….……..……Appellant C/O. Raj Kumar, Sri Ram Nursing Home, S.K. Puri, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Aqgpk0359J] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….……...Respondent Ward-4(1), Patna, 4Th Floor, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, Dak Bunglow Road, Patna-800001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Manish Rastogi, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: March 11, 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 is engaged in the business medicine. The assessee filed her return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 20.09.2019 in response to notice under section 142(1) of the Act, where she declared her business income and admitted

PIONEER EDUCATION SOCIETY,HARYANA vs. ITO, PATNA

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. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and proprietor of a petrol pump of Bharat Petroleum running in the name and style of M/s. Jaya Fuels situated at West Boring Canal Road, Patna. The assessee during the financial year 2016- 17 corresponding to assessment year 2017-18, derived income from

JAYA SINGH,PATNA vs. DC,AC CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR, BHAGALPUR, BIHAR

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. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

delay is condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and proprietor of a petrol pump of Bharat Petroleum running in the name and style of M/s. Jaya Fuels situated at West Boring Canal Road, Patna. The assessee during the financial year 2016- 17 corresponding to assessment year 2017-18, derived income from

SANJAY KUMAR,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 6, 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 its return of income for AY 2017-18 on 03.11.2017 showing total income of Rs.23,22,870/- under the head profit and gains from business or profession. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS to verify the issue on cash deposit during demonetization period

PAWAN KUMAR, PROP. LIFE LINE RICE MILLS ,BEGUSARAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), , BEGUSARAI

In the result, these two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

condoned the delay in filing the appeals. Considering the interest of justice, the assessee was given another chance to present their case before the Ld. AO for fresh assessment.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "148", "144", "145(3)", "147

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

147 of the Act, dated 12.09.2019. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 68 days. An application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under: “The appellant filed this appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna on 30/10/24 after delay

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

147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 13.03.2023. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 69 days. An application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under: “I had received information from the present counsel on 17th March, 2025 that the said appeal

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

147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay. 4. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. Before the Ld. CIT(A) the ground for condonation of delay was mentioned