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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

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

4. For that the order of assessment dated 21/11/2019 bearing DIN & Order No: NIL passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Patna is invalid in view of the fact that there was no DIN mentioned

SANGAM ALMIRAH PRIVATE LIMITED,MUZAFFARPUR vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2018-19 dated 10.06.2025, which has been passed against the penalty order u/s 270A of the Act, dated 10.02.2022. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the orders of the authorities below

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. AJIT KUMAR, BETTIAH

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 dated 30.11.2023, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act, dated 30.12.2019. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’). 2. As the issue raised are common and pertains to same assessee, these appeals have been heard together and being disposed of by this common order for sake of convenience and brevity. 3. Perusal of grounds of Revenue’s appeal reveals that the sole grievance in all these bunch of appeals

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’). 2. As the issue raised are common and pertains to same assessee, these appeals have been heard together and being disposed of by this common order for sake of convenience and brevity. 3. Perusal of grounds of Revenue’s appeal reveals that the sole grievance in all these bunch of appeals

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’). 2. As the issue raised are common and pertains to same assessee, these appeals have been heard together and being disposed of by this common order for sake of convenience and brevity. 3. Perusal of grounds of Revenue’s appeal reveals that the sole grievance in all these bunch of appeals

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’). 2. As the issue raised are common and pertains to same assessee, these appeals have been heard together and being disposed of by this common order for sake of convenience and brevity. 3. Perusal of grounds of Revenue’s appeal reveals that the sole grievance in all these bunch of appeals

GUPTA JI BROTHERS RICE PRIVATE LIMITED,DALMIA NAGAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3, GAYA

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

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereafter ‘the Ld. CIT(A)], vide order dated 21.12.2022. 1.1 In this case, the assessee filed its return of income on 26.11.2014 for the assessment year under consideration and after detailed I.T.A. No. 33/Pat/2023 Gupta

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

disallowance of the deduction, even if the payment was made before the due date\nfor filing the ROI. We need to remind ourselves that this is exactly the case in the present\nappeal. The judgment reinforced the distinction between employer and employee\ncontributions. While an employer's contributions could be governed by section 43B of the\nAct, employees' contributions

LAKSHMI MANDAL,MADHUBANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MADHUBANI

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

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)]. 2. Brief facts of the Case are that the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of ₹4,02,890/-. The return was processed under section

BRIJESH KUMAR,WEST CHAMPARAN vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed and the net profit works out to about 12%. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee had filed the paper book but the same was not admitted under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and our attention was drawn to page 3 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) where it is mentioned in para 4

BIR BABU PANDEY,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO WARD 2(4), SIWAN

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

250(4) on this issue. On examining the facts\n& details submitted and lying on the record the only basis of supporting this\nadditions by A.O. narrated at page no. 18 of paper book as below:-\n“On perusal of the cash book from 01.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 it is seen that\nafter depositing the cash into bank

WASEEM ALAM,WEST CHAMPARAN vs. ITO, NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.17/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Waseem Alam…...………………….....…..…………………....Appellant Bhawanipur Kursi Barawa, Sikta, West Champaran, Bihar-845307. [Pan: Alopa0369B] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi…………..……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 22, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.11.2024 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. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.9,68,550. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under The E- Assessment Scheme, With The Specific Issue Of Verification Of Large Deduction Claimed Under Section 57 Of The Act. Notice Under Section 143(2) & Subsequently Under Section 142(1) Was Issued To The Assessee. Although The Assessee Uploaded Certain Documents Electronically In Response, The Details Were Found To Be Incomplete. The

250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts of the Case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 declaring total income of Rs.9,68,550. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for limited scrutiny under

SIS CASH SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) on 30.05.2023 by Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi.\n1.1. In this case, Ld. Assessing Officer, CPC initially accepted the return of income (ROI) of the assessee vide intimation dated 31.03.2021. Thereafter, the Ld. Assessing Officer took up proceedings u/s. 154 of the Act to disallow Rs.2

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,BHAGALPUR vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA, PATNA

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter\nreferred to as 'the Act') for AY 2021-22 dated 16.08.2024, which has\nbeen passed against the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated\n30.12.2022.\n2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following\ngrounds of appeal:\n“1. For that the grounds hereto are without prejudice