ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

6. The ld. A.R. vehemently submitted before the Bench that the order passed by the ld. PCIT by exercising his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act as the A.Ys. 2012-2013 & 2014-2015 Alkem Laboratories Limited, Patna revisionary jurisdiction has been exercised beyond the period of limitation as prescribed

ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

6. The ld. A.R. vehemently submitted before the Bench that the order passed by the ld. PCIT by exercising his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act as the A.Ys. 2012-2013 & 2014-2015 Alkem Laboratories Limited, Patna revisionary jurisdiction has been exercised beyond the period of limitation as prescribed

ACIT vs. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WELFARE HUMAN RESOURCES,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed while the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

6 onward. The total income was assessed under section 144/147 of the Act vide order dated 29.12.2010. 5.2 The Ld. CIT(A) quashed the proceeding under section 147 by holding in para 4 that against the order of first reassessment, relief was allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) and an appeal was filed by the Ld. AO before the ITAT

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

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

11. In his next fold of submission, he contended that if no search was conducted at the premises of the assessee, then, there would not be any discovery of incriminating material, which could enable the ld. Assessing Officer to make an addition in an assessment passed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act. For buttressing this submission

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

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

11. In his next fold of submission, he contended that if no search was conducted at the premises of the assessee, then, there would not be any discovery of incriminating material, which could enable the ld. Assessing Officer to make an addition in an assessment passed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act. For buttressing this submission

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR vs. NANDKUMAR PRASAD SAH, SARAIYGANJ ROAD, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

11, “in case no incriminating material is found during the search, the power of the revenue to have the reassessment under section 147/148 has to be saved, otherwise the revenue would be left without remedy”. Thus, the Revenue is not precluded from taking any action u/s 148 of the Act as per law. Since at the time of assessment made

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, FOURTH FLOOR, J.P. BHAVAN, DAKBUNGLOW CHAURAHA, PATNA vs. TULSHYAN METALS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal is allowed and the order of the High Court is vacated

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.339&340/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1, Patna……..........................................................……….……Appellant Vs. Tulshyan Metals Pvt. Ltd…………………………...............……...…..…..Respondent 3D, Shakambari Complex, Sabji Bazar Chowk, Nagla Bihar-800008. [Pan: Aacct2904K] Appearances By: Shri Ashok Kumar Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 27, 2024 Order Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Even Date 30.01.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since, The Substantive Issues Are Common In Both The Assessment Years & The Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee, Therefore, The Two Appeals Are Being Disposed Of Through This Single Order. 2. However, In Both The Cases, The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act Through Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Has Been In Dispute, Whereby, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Held That Since Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Not Issued For Both The Years, Following The Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Then The Subsequent Orders Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144, R.W.S 144B Of The Act Would Be Null & Void. However, For The Sake Of Record, The Grounds In Both The Cases Are Extracted As Under:

6. We have considered the rival contentions and also perused the order of the authorities below. Right at the outset it needs to be mentioned that there appears to be some doubt about whether the assessee filed a Return of Income (hereafter ROI) before completion of assessment proceedings or after that. The Ld. CIT (A) has identically observed in paras

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, FOURTH FLOOR, LOKNAYAK JAY PRAKASH BHAWAN, DAKBUNGLOW CHAURAHA, PATNA vs. TULSHYAN METALS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal is allowed and the order of the High Court is vacated

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.339&340/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1, Patna……..........................................................……….……Appellant Vs. Tulshyan Metals Pvt. Ltd…………………………...............……...…..…..Respondent 3D, Shakambari Complex, Sabji Bazar Chowk, Nagla Bihar-800008. [Pan: Aacct2904K] Appearances By: Shri Ashok Kumar Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 27, 2024 Order Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Even Date 30.01.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since, The Substantive Issues Are Common In Both The Assessment Years & The Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee, Therefore, The Two Appeals Are Being Disposed Of Through This Single Order. 2. However, In Both The Cases, The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act Through Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Has Been In Dispute, Whereby, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Held That Since Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Not Issued For Both The Years, Following The Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Then The Subsequent Orders Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144, R.W.S 144B Of The Act Would Be Null & Void. However, For The Sake Of Record, The Grounds In Both The Cases Are Extracted As Under:

6. We have considered the rival contentions and also perused the order of the authorities below. Right at the outset it needs to be mentioned that there appears to be some doubt about whether the assessee filed a Return of Income (hereafter ROI) before completion of assessment proceedings or after that. The Ld. CIT (A) has identically observed in paras

MADHURI DEVI,SAHARSA vs. ITO WARD- 3 (4), SAHARSA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment notice would be without jurisdiction. 4. For that, the Learned AO has erred in framing assessment proceeding without issuing/serving Notice under section 143(2). The Ld AO never issued /served notice u/s 142(1) till date of passing of re-assessment order. 5. For that the Learned AO has erred in making addition

SAROJ BALA,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 &

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA. The Tribunal while quashing the assessment order had relied upon its earlier decision in Navin Jain and Others (Supra) wherein a detailed discussion has been made with

MURLIDHAR PRASAD,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 &

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144-BA." 11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D

PUNRASAR JUTE PARK LIMITED,PURNEA vs. CIT, PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

6) of the Act to both the loan creditor companies to which sufficient compliance was made along with the documents asked for by the ld. Assessing Officer. In nutshell, genuineness of the unsecured loan received by the assessee during the relevant financial year stood examined by the ld. Assessing Officer in the assessment proceeding

ALKEM LABORATORIES LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. 12. The first issue for our consideration raised in Ground No. 3, 4 & 5 is that whether the interest is chargeable u/s 234B(3) or 234B(4) of the Act. For better understanding, we will go through the relevant sections:- “[(3) Where, as a result

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1,PATNA, PATNA vs. MURLIDHAR PRASAD, PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA. The Tribunal while quashing the assessment order had relied upon its earlier decision in Navin Jain and Others (Supra) wherein a detailed discussion has been made with

SAROJ BALA,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA. The Tribunal while quashing the assessment order had relied upon its earlier decision in Navin Jain and Others (Supra) wherein a detailed discussion has been made with

MURLIDHAR PRASAD,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA. The Tribunal while quashing the assessment order had relied upon its earlier decision in Navin Jain and Others (Supra) wherein a detailed discussion has been made with

MURLIDHAR PRASAD,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA. The Tribunal while quashing the assessment order had relied upon its earlier decision in Navin Jain and Others (Supra) wherein a detailed discussion has been made with

MURLIDHAR PRASAD,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA. The Tribunal while quashing the assessment order had relied upon its earlier decision in Navin Jain and Others (Supra) wherein a detailed discussion has been made with

LOVELY RANI CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,PATNA BIHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, PATNA , PATNA

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA. The Tribunal while quashing the assessment order had relied upon its earlier decision in Navin Jain and Others (Supra) wherein a detailed discussion has been made with