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

3)No penalty under the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1). (4)The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation

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

3)No penalty under the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1). (4)The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation

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

3)No penalty under the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1). (4)The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation

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

3)No penalty under the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1). (4)The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation

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

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

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) income returned & accepted by\nAO in order passed u/s 153 Arws 143 (3) - HELD THAT:\nThere was no reference made to any incriminating\ndocument found during the search. Therefore, we are of\nthe view that the addition of undisclosed income was\nbased on the statement furnished under section

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

3 of the assessment order, ld. Assessing Officer has observed as under:- “Office may please issue DN/refund and challan accordingly. Penalty proceedings 2 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Subhash Pd. Yadav under section 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

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

271(1)(c) and levied penalty of Rs.1093704/-. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has only relied upon the A.O. order 3. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in applying the Apex Court order in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar. The Apex Court order is not applicable in the present case as no disclosure statement

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

271(1)(c) and levied penalty of Rs.1093704/-. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has only relied upon the A.O. order 3. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in applying the Apex Court order in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar. The Apex Court order is not applicable in the present case as no disclosure statement

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

271(1)(c) and levied penalty of Rs.1093704/-. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has only relied upon the A.O. order 3. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in applying the Apex Court order in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar. The Apex Court order is not applicable in the present case as no disclosure statement

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

271(1)(c) and levied penalty of Rs.1093704/-. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has only relied upon the A.O. order 3. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in applying the Apex Court order in the case of CIT vs. Prasanna Dugar. The Apex Court order is not applicable in the present case as no disclosure statement

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

3) read with section 153A of the Act. Considering the fact that assessee had declared additional income in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, the learned Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for alleged under reporting of income. However, the assessee filed an application belatedly u/s 270AA of the Act for grant

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

3) read with section 153A of the Act. Considering the fact that assessee had declared additional income in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, the learned Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for alleged under reporting of income. However, the assessee filed an application belatedly u/s 270AA of the Act for grant

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

3) read with section 153A of the Act. Considering the fact that assessee had declared additional income in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, the learned Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for alleged under reporting of income. However, the assessee filed an application belatedly u/s 270AA of the Act for grant

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

3) read with section 153A of the Act. Considering the fact that assessee had declared additional income in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, the learned Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for alleged under reporting of income. However, the assessee filed an application belatedly u/s 270AA of the Act for grant

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

3) read with section 153A of the Act. Considering the fact that assessee had declared additional income in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, the learned Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for alleged under reporting of income. However, the assessee filed an application belatedly u/s 270AA of the Act for grant

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

3) read with section 153A of the Act. Considering the fact that assessee had declared additional income in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act, the learned Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for alleged under reporting of income. However, the assessee filed an application belatedly u/s 270AA of the Act for grant

UMA KANT SINGH,PURNEA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not appear in response to the single notice fixing the date for hearing and is seen to have not filed any submission also in response to the said notice. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded ahead to confirm the penalty levied by the Ld. AO. We find an identical pattern in other appeals also of a single notice being issued by the Ld. CIT(A) for which there was seen to be no response from the side of the assessee and thereafter, the penalty imposed in all the

section 270A of the Act. Since, 2 ITA Nos. 148-152/Kol/2023 Uma Kant Singh the issues are inter-connected, these five appeals are being disposed of through a single order. For the sake of convenience, the lead case shall be taken as ITA No. 148/Pat/2023 pertaining to AY 2015-16. 2. In these five cases, the following

UMA KANT SINGH,PURNEA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not appear in response to the single notice fixing the date for hearing and is seen to have not filed any submission also in response to the said notice. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded ahead to confirm the penalty levied by the Ld. AO. We find an identical pattern in other appeals also of a single notice being issued by the Ld. CIT(A) for which there was seen to be no response from the side of the assessee and thereafter, the penalty imposed in all the

section 270A of the Act. Since, 2 ITA Nos. 148-152/Kol/2023 Uma Kant Singh the issues are inter-connected, these five appeals are being disposed of through a single order. For the sake of convenience, the lead case shall be taken as ITA No. 148/Pat/2023 pertaining to AY 2015-16. 2. In these five cases, the following