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

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 16/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mintu Rani. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, ['the NFAC] erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant, vide

RAJ KUMAR SINGH ,PATNA vs. ITO,WARD-6(4),PATNA , PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, [the CIT(A)] erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant by confirming the assessment

NITESH DUTT JHA,MADHUBANI vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (5), MADHUBANI

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & 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) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A), NFAC was not justified in not accepting the ground of appeal raised to the effect that ex parte

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

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

72,792/-. 2. It is stated that the contract work was executed by partnership firm, therefore, contract receipt were shown in the return of the partnership firm. The partnership firm had filed return with respect to the contract business. The individual partner had not shown income on account of contract business in his individual return. In individual business only income

MAHMOOD ALAM,PATNA vs. DC/AC, CIRCLE-5, PATNA, PATNA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

72, Bazar Samiti Road,\nMahendru S.O, Sampatchak,\nPatna - 800006\n[PAN: AAWFA9836C]\nvs.\nAppellant\nDC/AC, Circle 5,\nPatna (Bihar) – 800001\nRespondent\nAppearances by:\nAssessee represented by\nPawan Kumar, CA\nDepartment represented by\nSh. Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT\nDate of concluding the hearing\n30.04.2025\nDate of pronouncing the order\n21.05.2025\nORDER\nPER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n1. In this case, there

RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

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

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

delay is hereby condoned and the matter is admitted for adjudication. 2. It is noticed that this is an appeal filed on 31.12.2020 and has gone through 10 days of hearing beginning from 02.11.2022 to the last one being on 01.01.2025. It is seen that either adjournments have been taken by the Ld. AR or none have attended on certain

KHURSHID ASHRAF,PATNA vs. ITO WARD-4 (5), PATNA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condone the delay and decide the appeal on merit. 3. The assessee has taken eleven grounds of appeal, which are descriptive in nature. Before adverting to the specific grounds of appeal, we deem it appropriate to take note of facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed his return

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

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

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

condone the delay of 25 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. That the Hon'ble PCIT, Patna erred in appreciating the facts properly. 2. That the Hon'ble PCIT erred in treating the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

condone the delay of 25 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. That the Hon'ble PCIT, Patna erred in appreciating the facts properly. 2. That the Hon'ble PCIT erred in treating the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer

RANJEET KUMAR,MUZAFFARPUR vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to decide it on merit. 4. This appeal was filed in 2022. It is to be decided on priority being an appeal filed against the order passed under section 263. The President of ITAT way back in 2016 has issued guidelines for deciding these appeals on priority because their pendency would