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

270A. (4) The Assessing Officer shall, within a period of one month from the end of the month in which the application under sub-section (1) is received, pass an order accepting or rejecting such application: Provided that no order rejecting the application shall be passed unless the assessee has been given an opportunity of being heard. (5) The order

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

270A. (4) The Assessing Officer shall, within a period of one month from the end of the month in which the application under sub-section (1) is received, pass an order accepting or rejecting such application: Provided that no order rejecting the application shall be passed unless the assessee has been given an opportunity of being heard. (5) The order

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

270A. (4) The Assessing Officer shall, within a period of one month from the end of the month in which the application under sub-section (1) is received, pass an order accepting or rejecting such application: Provided that no order rejecting the application shall be passed unless the assessee has been given an opportunity of being heard. (5) The order

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

270A. (4) The Assessing Officer shall, within a period of one month from the end of the month in which the application under sub-section (1) is received, pass an order accepting or rejecting such application: Provided that no order rejecting the application shall be passed unless the assessee has been given an opportunity of being heard. (5) The order

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

VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, PATNA

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

condoning I.T.A. Nos.429to 434/Pat/2025 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd delay and without proper adjudication of the assessee’s submissions. Considering that the matter requires factual verification and proper adjudication, and in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide

VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, PATNA

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

condoning I.T.A. Nos.429to 434/Pat/2025 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd delay and without proper adjudication of the assessee’s submissions. Considering that the matter requires factual verification and proper adjudication, and in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide

VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

condoning I.T.A. Nos.429to 434/Pat/2025 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd delay and without proper adjudication of the assessee’s submissions. Considering that the matter requires factual verification and proper adjudication, and in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide

VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, PATNA

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

condoning I.T.A. Nos.429to 434/Pat/2025 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd delay and without proper adjudication of the assessee’s submissions. Considering that the matter requires factual verification and proper adjudication, and in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide

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

270A of the Act. The Petitioner had received a notice dated 22.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2018-2019 calling upon to show cause as to why assessment should not be completed as per the draft assessment order. The Petitioner was to submit its response by 23:59 hours of 24.04.2021. On 23.04.2021, the Petitioner filed its response mentioning the objections

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

270A of the Act. The Petitioner had received a notice dated 22.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2018-2019 calling upon to show cause as to why assessment should not be completed as per the draft assessment order. The Petitioner was to submit its response by 23:59 hours of 24.04.2021. On 23.04.2021, the Petitioner filed its response mentioning the objections

ARUN KUMAR MANDAL,ARARIA vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (3), PURNEA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 119/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Arun Prasad Mondal,……………………………Appellant C/O. Shiv Narayan (Prop. Maa Dhaneshwari Khad Beej Bhandar), Bardha (Sikti), Araria-854333, Bihar [Pan:Bohpm1854A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………….Respondent Ward-3(3), Purnea, Near Jail Chowk, Nh-31, Purnea-854301, Bihar

delay is condoned. 4. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. Therefore, I have decided to dispose of the appeal after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-assessee is an individual, who filed income tax return on 29.03.2018 disclosing

RANI DEVI,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who is running a wholesale business as her proprietorship concern in the name of M/s. Gwalior Industries. The assessee filed her return of income electronically showing aggregate income of Rs.6,48,570/-. The case was selected

PANKAJ KUMAR,MUZAFFARPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.649, 645, 646 & 650/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2017–18, 2018–19, 2019–20 & 2020–21 Pankaj Kumar……..……………..………. …………………....Appellant Saraiyaganj, Muzaffarpur, Bihar-842001.. [Pan: Alipk3534A] Vs. Cit Patna……………......…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Amit Kamalia, Ca., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 21, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Four Captioned Appeals—Ita No. 649/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2017–18, Ita No. 645/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2018–19, Ita No. 646/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2019–20 & Ita No. 650/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2020–21—Are Filed By The Same Assessee Against The Orders Of The Learned Cit(A), Relating To Penalty Imposed Under Section 270A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Arising Out Of The Respective Assessment Orders. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variation In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That There Is A Delay Of Four Days In Filing The Appeals Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition

delay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up as a lead ITA No. 649/Patna/2024case A.Y. 2017–18 and finding of this will apply to other connected appeal mutatis mutandis. A search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was conducted in the case of the Nand Kishore Prasad Shah

PANKAJ KUMAR,MUZAFFARPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.649, 645, 646 & 650/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2017–18, 2018–19, 2019–20 & 2020–21 Pankaj Kumar……..……………..………. …………………....Appellant Saraiyaganj, Muzaffarpur, Bihar-842001.. [Pan: Alipk3534A] Vs. Cit Patna……………......…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Amit Kamalia, Ca., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 21, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Four Captioned Appeals—Ita No. 649/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2017–18, Ita No. 645/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2018–19, Ita No. 646/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2019–20 & Ita No. 650/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2020–21—Are Filed By The Same Assessee Against The Orders Of The Learned Cit(A), Relating To Penalty Imposed Under Section 270A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Arising Out Of The Respective Assessment Orders. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variation In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That There Is A Delay Of Four Days In Filing The Appeals Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition

delay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up as a lead ITA No. 649/Patna/2024case A.Y. 2017–18 and finding of this will apply to other connected appeal mutatis mutandis. A search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was conducted in the case of the Nand Kishore Prasad Shah

PANKAJ KUMAR,MUZAFFARPUR vs. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.649, 645, 646 & 650/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2017–18, 2018–19, 2019–20 & 2020–21 Pankaj Kumar……..……………..………. …………………....Appellant Saraiyaganj, Muzaffarpur, Bihar-842001.. [Pan: Alipk3534A] Vs. Cit Patna……………......…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Amit Kamalia, Ca., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 21, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Four Captioned Appeals—Ita No. 649/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2017–18, Ita No. 645/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2018–19, Ita No. 646/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2019–20 & Ita No. 650/Patna/2024 For A.Y. 2020–21—Are Filed By The Same Assessee Against The Orders Of The Learned Cit(A), Relating To Penalty Imposed Under Section 270A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Arising Out Of The Respective Assessment Orders. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variation In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That There Is A Delay Of Four Days In Filing The Appeals Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition

delay is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up as a lead ITA No. 649/Patna/2024case A.Y. 2017–18 and finding of this will apply to other connected appeal mutatis mutandis. A search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was conducted in the case of the Nand Kishore Prasad Shah

RAJEEV KUMAR,BIHAR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), CHAPRA, BIHAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in terms indicated above

Bench: The Learned Cit(A), Where Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Penalty. Aggrieved, By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) The Assessee Is In Appeal Before This Tribunal.

delay of 15 days in filing the appeals are hereby condoned. The appeals are admitted for adjudication. 3. The brief facts are that the Assessing Officer, pursuant to the assessment order dated 23.12.2019, levied penalty under section 271AAC(1) dated 04.08.2021 and another penalty order under section 270A

RAJEEV KUMAR,BIHAR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), CHAPRA, BIHAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed in terms indicated above

Bench: The Learned Cit(A), Where Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Penalty. Aggrieved, By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) The Assessee Is In Appeal Before This Tribunal.

delay of 15 days in filing the appeals are hereby condoned. The appeals are admitted for adjudication. 3. The brief facts are that the Assessing Officer, pursuant to the assessment order dated 23.12.2019, levied penalty under section 271AAC(1) dated 04.08.2021 and another penalty order under section 270A