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

ROHIT KUMAR JHUNJHUNWALA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-5(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. 73/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Rohit Kumar Jhunjhunwala,……………….…Appellant Keshev Rai Lane Chowk, Patna City-800008, Bihar [Pan:Aaqpj7024F] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-5(1), Patna Appearances By: Shri Alok Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), Panchkula, dated 23rd December, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income electronically on 16.09.2016 showing aggregate income of Rs.4,65,400/-. The case

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) of section 43B. 6) For that the addition on account of interest payable to NCDC is, therefore, liable to be deleted. 7) For that the appellant has carried forward loss of Rs. 50,33,596/- and carried forward unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 44,65,970/- which should have been allowed against the income determined. 8) For that other grounds

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