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:

reassessment or recomputation as specified in sub-section (2) of section 153, every such notice referred to in this clause shall be deemed to be a valid notice.] [Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that nothing contained in the first proviso or the second proviso shall apply to any return which has been furnished

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.

iii) Although there is change in the scheme of Sections 147, 148 and 149 of the Act from the corresponding Section 34 of the 1922 Act, the legal requirement of service of notice upon the Assessee in terms of Section 148 read with Section 282 (1) and Section 153 (2) of the Act is a jurisdictional pre-condition to finalizing

MERIDIAN CONSTRUCTION INDIA LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2, PATNA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

iii) charge fees at a rate not exceeding the rate or rates prescribed in this behalf; (iv) not undertake valuation of any asset in which he has a direct or indirect interest. Assessment Years: 2014-2015 to 2017-2018 Meridian Construction India Limited (4) The report of valuation of any asset by a registered valuer shall be in the prescribed

MERIDIAN CONSTRUCTION INDIA LIMITED,PATNA BIHAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2 PATNA, PATNA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

iii) charge fees at a rate not exceeding the rate or rates prescribed in this behalf; (iv) not undertake valuation of any asset in which he has a direct or indirect interest. Assessment Years: 2014-2015 to 2017-2018 Meridian Construction India Limited (4) The report of valuation of any asset by a registered valuer shall be in the prescribed

MERIDIAN CONSTRUCTION INDIA LIMITED,PATNA, BIHAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2 PATNA, PATNA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

iii) charge fees at a rate not exceeding the rate or rates prescribed in this behalf; (iv) not undertake valuation of any asset in which he has a direct or indirect interest. Assessment Years: 2014-2015 to 2017-2018 Meridian Construction India Limited (4) The report of valuation of any asset by a registered valuer shall be in the prescribed

MERIDIAN CONSTRUCTION INDIA LIMITED,PATNA BIHAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2 PATNA, PATNA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

iii) charge fees at a rate not exceeding the rate or rates prescribed in this behalf; (iv) not undertake valuation of any asset in which he has a direct or indirect interest. Assessment Years: 2014-2015 to 2017-2018 Meridian Construction India Limited (4) The report of valuation of any asset by a registered valuer shall be in the prescribed

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

2), the time taken in giving an opportunity to the assessee to be reheard under the proviso to section 129 and any period during which any proceeding under this section is stayed by an order or injunction of any court shall be excluded." 13. A bare perusal of sub section-1 would reveal that powers of revision granted by section

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

2), the time taken in giving an opportunity to the assessee to be reheard under the proviso to section 129 and any period during which any proceeding under this section is stayed by an order or injunction of any court shall be excluded." 13. A bare perusal of sub section-1 would reveal that powers of revision granted by section

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

2), the time taken in giving an opportunity to the assessee to be reheard under the proviso to section 129 and any period during which any proceeding under this section is stayed by an order or injunction of any court shall be excluded." 13. A bare perusal of sub section-1 would reveal that powers of revision granted by section

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

2), the time taken in giving an opportunity to the assessee to be reheard under the proviso to section 129 and any period during which any proceeding under this section is stayed by an order or injunction of any court shall be excluded." 13. A bare perusal of sub section-1 would reveal that powers of revision granted by section

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

2), the time taken in giving an opportunity to the assessee to be reheard under the proviso to section 129 and any period during which any proceeding under this section is stayed by an order or injunction of any court shall be excluded." 13. A bare perusal of sub section-1 would reveal that powers of revision granted by section

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

14. Having considered the rivals submissions of the case as well as the case laws/sections as relied on by the both the parties, we are of the opinion that as far as a service of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is concerned, it is now settled law that the same is mandatory for making the assessment u/s.143

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

14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19 dated 24.01.2024 and 25.01.2024, which have been passed against the assessment orders u/s 143(3)/147, 144/147, 143(3)/263, 143(3), 143(3) and 143(3)/144B of the Act, respectively on various dates. 2. Since the issues in all the appeals are common, all the appeals were heard

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

14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19 dated 24.01.2024 and 25.01.2024, which have been passed against the assessment orders u/s 143(3)/147, 144/147, 143(3)/263, 143(3), 143(3) and 143(3)/144B of the Act, respectively on various dates. 2. Since the issues in all the appeals are common, all the appeals were heard

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

14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19 dated 24.01.2024 and 25.01.2024, which have been passed against the assessment orders u/s 143(3)/147, 144/147, 143(3)/263, 143(3), 143(3) and 143(3)/144B of the Act, respectively on various dates. 2. Since the issues in all the appeals are common, all the appeals were heard

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

14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19 dated 24.01.2024 and 25.01.2024, which have been passed against the assessment orders u/s 143(3)/147, 144/147, 143(3)/263, 143(3), 143(3) and 143(3)/144B of the Act, respectively on various dates. 2. Since the issues in all the appeals are common, all the appeals were heard

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

14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19 dated 24.01.2024 and 25.01.2024, which have been passed against the assessment orders u/s 143(3)/147, 144/147, 143(3)/263, 143(3), 143(3) and 143(3)/144B of the Act, respectively on various dates. 2. Since the issues in all the appeals are common, all the appeals were heard

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

14, 2014-15, 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19 dated 24.01.2024 and 25.01.2024, which have been passed against the assessment orders u/s 143(3)/147, 144/147, 143(3)/263, 143(3), 143(3) and 143(3)/144B of the Act, respectively on various dates. 2. Since the issues in all the appeals are common, all the appeals were heard

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

14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: I.T.A. No.: 248/PAT/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Nandkumar Prasad Sah. i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Sec Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A; ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated