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 PRIVATE 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 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 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 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

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 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

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

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

KUMAR SUMAN SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

263 of the Act passed by\nthe ld. CIT(Central), Patna had already upheld by the ITAT in its order\ndated 01.02.2008 and the order passed by the Tribunal attained finality\nas it was not challenged before any higher forum. Therefore, this ground\ntaken by the assessee is hereby dismissed.\n10. Ground No.2 In respect of ground no.2 which

DEEPAK SHRAWAN BUDHIA,MUMBAI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF I.T., PATNA-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of disallowance of expenditure on account of non-deduction of TDS on freight as per provisions of section