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

section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance of the notices at the end of the assessee. Ultimately the ld. Assessing Officer gone through the books of account submitted before her and made these two additions by recording the following finding:- “Addition u/s 40A(3) for payments exceeding Rs.20,000/- through bearer cheques:- On perusal of Books

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

disallowing Rs.33,05,28,937/- on the account of deduction claimed u/s 801A of the Act due to interest income from Fixed Deposit, Saving Account and other income. 11. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” III. ITA No. 332/PAT/2024; AY 2014-15: “1. For that the grounds of appeal

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

disallowing Rs.33,05,28,937/- on the account of deduction claimed u/s 801A of the Act due to interest income from Fixed Deposit, Saving Account and other income. 11. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” III. ITA No. 332/PAT/2024; AY 2014-15: “1. For that the grounds of appeal

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

disallowing Rs.33,05,28,937/- on the account of deduction claimed u/s 801A of the Act due to interest income from Fixed Deposit, Saving Account and other income. 11. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” III. ITA No. 332/PAT/2024; AY 2014-15: “1. For that the grounds of appeal

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

disallowing Rs.33,05,28,937/- on the account of deduction claimed u/s 801A of the Act due to interest income from Fixed Deposit, Saving Account and other income. 11. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” III. ITA No. 332/PAT/2024; AY 2014-15: “1. For that the grounds of appeal

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

disallowing Rs.33,05,28,937/- on the account of deduction claimed u/s 801A of the Act due to interest income from Fixed Deposit, Saving Account and other income. 11. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” III. ITA No. 332/PAT/2024; AY 2014-15: “1. For that the grounds of appeal

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

disallowing Rs.33,05,28,937/- on the account of deduction claimed u/s 801A of the Act due to interest income from Fixed Deposit, Saving Account and other income. 11. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” III. ITA No. 332/PAT/2024; AY 2014-15: “1. For that the grounds of appeal

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

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

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

BIHAR COMBINED ENTRANCE COMPETITIVE EXAMINATION BOARD,PATNA vs. ACIT(EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE), PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

28,996/-. In making the assessment, the ld. Assessing Officer brought to tax the surplus of income over expenditure as shown in the Income and Expenditure Account. The assessee in its return has claimed exemption in respect of its total income under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act on the grounds that it is constituted and substantially financed

BIHAR COMBINED ENTRANCE COMPETITIVE EXAMINATION BOARD,PATNA vs. ACIT(EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE), PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

28,996/-. In making the assessment, the ld. Assessing Officer brought to tax the surplus of income over expenditure as shown in the Income and Expenditure Account. The assessee in its return has claimed exemption in respect of its total income under section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act on the grounds that it is constituted and substantially financed

ACIT vs. M/S CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,

In the result, the appeals of the department as well as the Cross

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Amit Shukla, Jm Ita No. 28/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 29/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Tax, Circle-1, Tapeshwar Bhawan, Mangal Pandey Patna Path, Ara, Bhojpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtc0114A

section 194H will not be applicable, hence the disallowance made by the 4 ITA Nos. 28 & 29/Pat./2015 CO Nos. 2 & 3/Del/2015

ACIT, PATNA vs. CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,

In the result, the appeals of the department as well as the Cross

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Amit Shukla, Jm Ita No. 28/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 29/Pat./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Tax, Circle-1, Tapeshwar Bhawan, Mangal Pandey Patna Path, Ara, Bhojpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtc0114A

section 194H will not be applicable, hence the disallowance made by the 4 ITA Nos. 28 & 29/Pat./2015 CO Nos. 2 & 3/Del/2015

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

28, 2022 1 A.Y. 2011-2012 & Hemant Kr. Das O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The Revenue and assessee are in cross appeals against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-2 dated 18.09.2020 passed for assessment year 2011-12. 2. First we take the appeal of the Revenue. The Revenue

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.

28 | 71 Assessment Year : 2010 -2011 jurisdiction under section 147(a) can be tested only by reference to the reasons recorded under section 148(2) of the Act and the Income-tax Officer is not authorised to refer to any other reason even if it can be otherwise inferred and/or gathered from the records. If the reasons so recorded