PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

u/s 132 of the Act. and for necessary reference Section 271 AAA of the Act is reproduced below: - “Section 271AAA in The Income Tax Act, 1961 271AAA. [ Penalty

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

u/s 132 of the Act. and for necessary reference Section 271 AAA of the Act is reproduced below: - “Section 271AAA in The Income Tax Act, 1961 271AAA. [ Penalty

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

u/s 132 of the Act. and for necessary reference Section 271 AAA of the Act is reproduced below: - “Section 271AAA in The Income Tax Act, 1961 271AAA. [ Penalty

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

u/s 132 of the Act. and for necessary reference Section 271 AAA of the Act is reproduced below: - “Section 271AAA in The Income Tax Act, 1961 271AAA. [ Penalty

ASHOKA TUBEWELL BORING ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained. The return filed under Section 153A is to be treated as a return under Section 139, and concealment must be judged against this return.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "271(1)(c)", "132(1)", "153A", "132(4)", "68" ], "issues": "Whether the penalty

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. SUBHASH PD. YADAV, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

271(1)(c) of the Act are initiated for concealment of income”. 5. Ld. Assessing Officer thereafter imposed a penalty under section 271AAB(1A) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty order is a very brief order, which reads as under:- “A search and seizure operation u/s 132

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the both the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, we for the purpose of adjudication taken up the facts of ITA No. 184/PAT/2023, for A.Y. 2014-15 in the case of Nand Kumar Prasad Sah and our decision shall apply mutatis mutandis to all the remaining captioned appeals. 03. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: - “1. For that

NAND KUMAR PRASAD SAH,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the both the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, we for the purpose of adjudication taken up the facts of ITA No. 184/PAT/2023, for A.Y. 2014-15 in the case of Nand Kumar Prasad Sah and our decision shall apply mutatis mutandis to all the remaining captioned appeals. 03. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: - “1. For that

NAND KUMAR PRASAD SAH,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the both the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, we for the purpose of adjudication taken up the facts of ITA No. 184/PAT/2023, for A.Y. 2014-15 in the case of Nand Kumar Prasad Sah and our decision shall apply mutatis mutandis to all the remaining captioned appeals. 03. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: - “1. For that

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the both the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, we for the purpose of adjudication taken up the facts of ITA No. 184/PAT/2023, for A.Y. 2014-15 in the case of Nand Kumar Prasad Sah and our decision shall apply mutatis mutandis to all the remaining captioned appeals. 03. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: - “1. For that

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

section (4) has not been followed while passing the penalty order which is against the intention of legislature behind the introduction of new regime of penalty is to create less litigation environment. It is well settled law that substantive right accrue to the applicant should not be defeated citing the procedural defects which is capable of being cured

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

section (4) has not been followed while passing the penalty order which is against the intention of legislature behind the introduction of new regime of penalty is to create less litigation environment. It is well settled law that substantive right accrue to the applicant should not be defeated citing the procedural defects which is capable of being cured

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

section (4) has not been followed while passing the penalty order which is against the intention of legislature behind the introduction of new regime of penalty is to create less litigation environment. It is well settled law that substantive right accrue to the applicant should not be defeated citing the procedural defects which is capable of being cured

NAND KUMAR PRASAD SAH,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

section (4) has not been followed while passing the penalty order which is against the intention of legislature behind the introduction of new regime of penalty is to create less litigation environment. It is well settled law that substantive right accrue to the applicant should not be defeated citing the procedural defects which is capable of being cured

NAND KUMAR PRASAD SAH,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

section (4) has not been followed while passing the penalty order which is against the intention of legislature behind the introduction of new regime of penalty is to create less litigation environment. It is well settled law that substantive right accrue to the applicant should not be defeated citing the procedural defects which is capable of being cured

BISHWANATH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. AC/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee (s) in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

section (4) has not been followed while passing the penalty order which is against the intention of legislature behind the introduction of new regime of penalty is to create less litigation environment. It is well settled law that substantive right accrue to the applicant should not be defeated citing the procedural defects which is capable of being cured

SHREE MANGALAM ALUMINIUM,PATNA vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

132 of the Act. 4. Now the assessee is in further appeals before the Tribunal for all the three assessment years i.e. AYs 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 and raised the following issues:- (1) For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in affirming penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the difference between income assessed and relief allowed

SHREE MANGALAM ALUMINIUM,PATNA vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

132 of the Act. 4. Now the assessee is in further appeals before the Tribunal for all the three assessment years i.e. AYs 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 and raised the following issues:- (1) For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in affirming penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the difference between income assessed and relief allowed