PUNRASAR JUTE PARK LIMITED,PURNEA vs. CIT, PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reopening completed assessment, where in the previous assessment proceedings, the then Assessing Officer has applied his mind and taken a conscious decision in respect of time usage charge component and partly disallowed

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN.LTD.,PATNA vs. CIT (APPEAL), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reopened u/s 148 of the Act after the expiry of 4 years solely on the ground of change of opinion. 9. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer has erred in disallowing

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, P)ATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reopened u/s 148 of the Act after the expiry of 4 years solely on the ground of change of opinion. 9. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer has erred in disallowing

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 2(1) PATNA, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reopened u/s 148 of the Act after the expiry of 4 years solely on the ground of change of opinion. 9. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer has erred in disallowing

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, COR-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reopened u/s 148 of the Act after the expiry of 4 years solely on the ground of change of opinion. 9. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer has erred in disallowing

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reopened u/s 148 of the Act after the expiry of 4 years solely on the ground of change of opinion. 9. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer has erred in disallowing

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reopened u/s 148 of the Act after the expiry of 4 years solely on the ground of change of opinion. 9. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer has erred in disallowing

KISHORI CAPITAL MARKETS PVT. LTD.,BBD BAGH (EAST) vs. ITO WARD 2(1), PATNA, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN

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

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

disallowance of Rs. 2,05,14,580/- has been dismissed but allowed the appeal of the assessee by allowing the credit for pre-assessment taxes paid and accordingly, the appeal has been dismissed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, the present appeal has been preferred. 1.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee challenges the impugned order on various

BIJAY KUMAR SARAF,DALDALI BAZAR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. DC/AC CIRCLE 1,MUZFFARPUR, IT-OFFICE, POLICE LINE, SIKANDERPUR MUZZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reopened and the Assessing Officer (“the Ld. AO”) issued a notice u/s 148, in response to ITA No.: 205/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Bijay Kumar Saraf. which, the assessee did not file any return of income. Since no compliance was made to the notice issued in the course of reassessment proceedings, the Ld. AO disallowed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A of the Act and the earlier assessment shall have to be reiterated. In this regard, this court is in complete agreement with the view adopted by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel (India), Jodhpur (supra). Besides, as rightly pointed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A of the Act and the earlier assessment shall have to be reiterated. In this regard, this court is in complete agreement with the view adopted by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel (India), Jodhpur (supra). Besides, as rightly pointed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. SONAMOTI AGROTECH PVT LTD, PATNA

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

disallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A of the Act and the earlier assessment shall have to be reiterated. In this regard, this court is in complete agreement with the view adopted by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel (India), Jodhpur (supra). Besides, as rightly pointed

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA 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

reopening the assessment for AY 2017-18 being Salary income offered as income from business and profession. After considering all the facts of the case and submission of the assessee, the Ld. AO treated ₹14,82,260/- as salary income received from the employer for AY 2017-18 and rejected the bogus expenses claimed at ₹7,32,030/- since

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA 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

reopening the assessment for AY 2017-18 being Salary income offered as income from business and profession. After considering all the facts of the case and submission of the assessee, the Ld. AO treated ₹14,82,260/- as salary income received from the employer for AY 2017-18 and rejected the bogus expenses claimed at ₹7,32,030/- since

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

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs. 13,33,8051- as sustained by the Assessing Officer on account of salary and interest payable to the partner is arbitrary, unjustified, void ab-initio and bad in law. The addition as sustained is fit to be deleted. 4. For that the appellant reserves its right to file detailed submission at the time of hearing

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

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

disallowance of Rs. 13,33,8051- as sustained by the Assessing Officer on account of salary and interest payable to the partner is arbitrary, unjustified, void ab-initio and bad in law. The addition as sustained is fit to be deleted. 4. For that the appellant reserves its right to file detailed submission at the time of hearing

PAVAN KUMAR BHAGAT,SAHARSA vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowing and adding Rs.11,65,739 claimed as commission expenses by the appellant, solely on the ground that the said deduction is not allowable in view of violation of provision of section 194G of the Act and section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, without considering the fact that the commission have been paid genuinely and through banking mode

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed and added to the total income of the appellant as income from other sources. 12. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer, without giving any opportunity, much less sufficient opportunity, has erred in holding that the appellant had sold immovable property for Rs.33,20,000 and taxed the same under

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)

reopening of assessment. 6. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying on judgments for upholding the initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 that too without confronting the appellant with the same. 7. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that there has been escapement to the extent of Rs. 1,44,000/- in the original