MASUDAN TANTI,BHAGALPUR vs. CIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2013-14 dated 26.11.2022 passed against

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,PATNA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 76/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises,………………………..........Appellant C/O. Nirmal & Associates, Nepali Kothi, Opposite Gasoline Petrol Pump, Boring Road, Patna-800001 [Pan:Aarfs8853J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Patna,…………………………………..……………..Respondent, Bihar-800001 Appearances By: Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 5Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 8Th, 2024 O R D E R

D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member:- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises (Central), Patna dated 14th March, 2022 for assessment year 2018-19. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:- (1) For that

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna dated 28.01.2015 passed for A.Y. 2009-10. 1 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 M/s. Kumar Construction 2. Grounds No. 1, 2 & 3 are inter-connected grounds therefore we first take these grounds

ACIT vs. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WELFARE HUMAN RESOURCES,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed while the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

1 crore during the AY. 2005-06. It is, therefore, not entitled to the claim of exemption u/s 10(23C) of the Act. 2. The assessee-Society has given interest free loans of Rs. 13,93,625/- and Rs. 16,68,523/- as 'Advance to Landlord'. At the same time, the Society has paid Rs. 18,00,000/- as rent

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)

D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. In this case, there is a delay of 241 days for which an application, accompanied by affidavit for condoning the said delay, has been filed. For the sake of record, the contents of the said petition is reproduced as under: “1 That the appellant received the order on 03.03.20 from

MAHUA COOPERATIVE COLD STORAGE LTD, MAHUA,VAISHALI vs. ADIT,CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

d) to section 43B of the Act read with Explanation 4(a), “public financial institutions” shall have the meaning assigned to it in section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956, and NCDC is a public financial institution as per section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956. Thus, the assessee was required to deposit the interest due on the loans availed

NORTH BIHAR POWER DISTRUBUTION CO. LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the revision order of Ld. Pr. CIT, Patna-1vide Order No. ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2021- 22/1042288650(1) dated 31.03.2022 u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act. 2. Appeal of the assessee is time barred by two days. However, from perusal

ASHOK KUMAR,BHOJPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, ARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

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

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income 1 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Ashok Kumar Tax (Appeals)-1, Patna dated 19th July, 2018 passed for A.Y. 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- (1) For that

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. These three appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders dated 08-12-2016, 15-01-2016, 11-12-2015 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeals [hereinafter referred to as ITA No.314 to316/Pat/18 AY 2009-10 Arun Construction Page 2 ‘CIT(A)’], Bhagalpur passed

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. These three appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders dated 08-12-2016, 15-01-2016, 11-12-2015 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeals [hereinafter referred to as ITA No.314 to316/Pat/18 AY 2009-10 Arun Construction Page 2 ‘CIT(A)’], Bhagalpur passed

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S R.P.RAI ESTATE PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Circle-1, Muzaffarpur M/S. R.P. Rai Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs 19, Goharua, Patliputra Colony, Patliputra, Patna- 800013. Pan: Aaccr 4972 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, Jcit, Dr Respondent By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2024 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.06.2020 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal), Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’].

D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JM: This appeal of the revenue for the assessment year 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 29.06.2020 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), Patna [hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. CIT(A)’]. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income declaring

RADHA GOVIND PUBLIC WELFARE SOCIETY,RAMGARH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

depreciation on the acquisition of fixed assets which has been allowed as application of income, Ld. CIT has not given any adverse comment or finding in the impugned order. 4 Radha Govind Public Welfare Society AY 2015-16 4.4. It is also submitted that though Ld. CIT has issued show cause notice u/s. 263 of the Act by raising twelve