GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL , PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

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

disallowance and deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessment has been completed without making proper inquiries or no inquiries. He also submitted that the draft assessment orders were sent to the ld. JCIT for granting approval under section 153D of the Act and the same was granted on 31.03.2022, which itself proves

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

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

disallowance and deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessment has been completed without making proper inquiries or no inquiries. He also submitted that the draft assessment orders were sent to the ld. JCIT for granting approval under section 153D of the Act and the same was granted on 31.03.2022, which itself proves

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

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

disallowance and deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessment has been completed without making proper inquiries or no inquiries. He also submitted that the draft assessment orders were sent to the ld. JCIT for granting approval under section 153D of the Act and the same was granted on 31.03.2022, which itself proves

DIVYA PRAKASH,BHOJPUR vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

disallowance under section 40A(3), therefore, no inquiry has been made by the ld. Assessing Officer while accepting the accounts of the assessee. Ld. Commissioner has rightly exercised power under section 263

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

263 of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was already completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order of assessment dated 30/12/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the Ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income

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

263 of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was already completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order of assessment dated 30/12/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the Ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income

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

263 of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was already completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order of assessment dated 30/12/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the Ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income

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

263 of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was already completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order of assessment dated 30/12/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the Ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income

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

263 of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was already completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order of assessment dated 30/12/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the Ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income

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

263 of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that the assessment for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was already completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order of assessment dated 30/12/2016 bearing DIN & Order No: Nil passed under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 by the Ld. assessing officer, viz. the Assistant Commissioner of Income

M/S KUMAR PIYUSH CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD,NALANDA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

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

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

disallowance also.” 2.0. Aggrieved with the action of Ld. PCIT, the assessee is in appeal before us with the following grounds of appeal: 3 M/s Kumar Piyush Construction Private Limited “Ground number 1 Was not justified in initiating proceedings under Section 263

PRABHAKAR JHA,MADHUBANI vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowances out of salary to staff, miscellaneous expenses, travelling expenses etc. The ld. Commissioner took cognizance under section 263 of the Income

SAJJAN BAJAJ vs. PR. C. I. T.,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

263 believed that the expenditure incurred in cash in violation to section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act ought to have been examined and should have been disallowed

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

section (1) after the expiry of two 3 North Bihar Power Distribution Co. Ltd. AY 2017-18 years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be revised was passed.” 4. Ground 4: The learned PCIT has erred in law, and passed an order u/s 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961 by non-considering replies

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)

section 263 of the Act. He observed that statutory liability of ₹92,734/- under the head “tax payable” was wrongly allowed and not disallowed

ITO, WARD-4(1), PATNA vs. HEMANT KUMAR DAS, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 263. Efforts at the end of the ld. CIT(DR) are that issue be remitted back to the Assessing officer for further investigation because ld. CIT(Appeals) has committed an error in blindly following the finding of the ld. Assessing Officer in a remand proceeding. It is true in a given circumstances, this aspect can be explored but before

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

section 263 of the Act. 4.2. Ld. Counsel also submitted that Ld. CIT has conducted the revisionary proceeding in a mechanical manner without any independent findings.He stated that out of twelve issues raised by the Ld. CIT, ten of them are the observations made by the auditor in the notes on account in Schedule I and audit report in Form

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

disallowed nor any addition was made. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the assessee had disclosed all the facts and no new fact was available to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, it was mere change of opinion on the part of the Assessing Officer and as such, the reassessment proceedings could not have been validly initiated