DEEPAK SHRAWAN BUDHIA,MUMBAI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF I.T., PATNA-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

section 40(a)(ia) of the 1. T. Act, 1961 was passed without considering all provisions of Sec 147 and without considering its exemption provisions. 5. For that, the order was passed without considering that no single payment above Rs. 30,000/-or total payment exceeding Rs. 1,00,000/- was paid to a single party during

SUJEET KUMAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD 6(1), PATNA, PATNA

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

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

condonation of the said delay as under: “1. That, the CIT Appeal had passed order on 08.03.2024 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18. The copy of order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, however, was served on income tax portal through online process. Therefore, there is delay of 40

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

40 days respectively.\n1.1 It is seen that the petition for condoning the said delays have been\nfiled for both of the years. However, for the sake of convenience, the\npetition filed for 2012-13 (ITA No. 14/Pat/2022) may be reproduced as\nunder:\n“1. That this is an application for condonation of delay the filing of the present\nappeal

JCIT(IN-SITU), CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. TECHNOCULTURE BUILDING CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes\nand Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

condoning the delay. Since\nboth the appeals have inter-connected issues hence, they are being heard\ntogether for simultaneous adjudication.\n\n2. These appeals arise from the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,\n1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax\n(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order dated\n12.12.2024

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S UTTAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law by deleting the disallowance of Rs. 43,67,25,641/- made

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

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

Section 263 of the Act by the Id. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna-1, Patna. Accordingly the appellant filed the present appeal. 7. That the appellant submits that the delay in filing the present appeal is not attributable to the appellant since the appellant was trying to exhaust his legal remedies. 8. That the appellant states that the delay

SMT. RANJU KUMARI,JAMUI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2 (5), LAKHISARAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115BBE of the Act. 3.2. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) but the same was delayed by 151 days. The reasons for delay stated by the assessee was that she was not aware of the income tax proceedings and only after being served with the penalty notice she came to know about the assessment order

ANIL KUMAR,NALANDA vs. ITO, WARD- 2 (3), BIHARSHARIF

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 361/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anil Kumar National Faceless Assessment Centre M/S Raj Trading Company, Nfac, Delhi Harnaut, Nalanda, Patna-803110 Vs Bihar [Pan : Azopc268H] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

condone the delay in the interest of justice and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the appellant has sought adjournment on one pretext or the other and is not interested in making any submission in response to various grounds of appeal

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S ASHA REALTY DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.\n\n3.\nThe first issue raised by the Revenue is against the deletion of addition of ₹3,96,94,221/- by the learned CIT (A) as made by the learned AO in respect of closing stock calculated under Percentage Completion Method by the learned AO.\n\n3.1. The facts in brief

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

ERSTWHILE BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK ,PATNA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

40 days occurred due to the fact that the assessee bank was not in existence since long and the notices were served on email to which the appellant had no access and as such no information regarding initiation of proceedings as well as passing of order was available. It was only on telephonic information received from the Department regarding payment

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

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

40 and sub-sections (3) and (3A) of section 40A, shall, mutatis mutandis, apply as they apply in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession". 3 I.T.A. No. 296/Pat/2023 New Era Social Development Welfare Society 3.1 It is felt that the Learned. CIT(A) has supported the action

BLUECHIP ASSET PRIVATE LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS BLUECHIP ADVISORY PVT. LTD,PATNA vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

delay filling of appeal that one of the director "Shanti Devi (DIN-01935923) was ill from last year. Due to illness of the director, we have not proper reply to CIT(A) also. And they have passed order accordingly as we have not reply on time to CIT(A). 5. That the, The Director (Shanti Devi (DIN-01935923) has passed

RAJ CONSTRUCTION,KATIHAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHAGALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raj Construction Circle – 1(1), C/O Mahadev Ghosh, Bhagalpur, Advocate Vs. Bf-199, Salt Lake City, R.N. Plaza, R.B.S.S Kolkata-700064 Sahay Road, Bhagalpur, Bihar- 812001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajfr6306F Assessee By : Shri Mahadev Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2024

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 03. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal; - “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC) has erred in passing the order confirming the disallowance of Sundry Creditors of the amount of 2,37,71,018 is arbitrary, unjustified

LAL BABU PRASAD,SIWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

delay of 437 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2 Lal Babu Prasad 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of trading in gold and silver ornaments. He filed his return of income for the assessment year 2015–16. A survey under section 133A

RAJ KISHOR PRASAD,NALANDA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX, DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.344/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raj Kishor Prasad………….. ………...…..…………………....Appellant Station Road, Harnaut, Nalanda, Bihar – 803110. [Pan: Bpkpp0668B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ajay Kr. Rastogi, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 13, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.01.2024 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’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 16 Days In Filing The Appeal. The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause Therein. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That An Information Was Received From The Insight Portal Which Suggested That The Income Chargeable To Tax Has Escaped Assessment In The Case Of The Assessee For The Assessment

condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the appeal on merits of the case. 3. Brief facts of the case are that an information was received from the INSIGHT portal which suggested that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the assessment I.T.A. No.344/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raj Kishor

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee are:- (a) in ITA No. 48/Pat/2020: 1. For that the appellate order passed u/s. 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. For that the ld. CIT(appeals) has not been justified in confirming the order passed