RANJEET SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (5), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section-115BBE and consequentially taxation @60%. 14. For that sustenance of addition of Rs. 12,00,000/- and Rs.8,00,000/- u/s 69A are wrong, illegal and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case. 15. For that the appellant reserves its right to furnish detailed written submission along with documents and evidences on or before date

SMT. RANJU KUMARI,JAMUI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2 (5), LAKHISARAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

69A of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 4. For that the learned CIT(A) has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the action of the AO in arbitrarily invoking the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act on the deposits made during the demonetization period without making a specific allegation that

PATNA IRON PVT. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of\nthe Revenue is dismissed

reassessment under sections 148 &\n147/148. In defense of his argument, the Id. AR relied on the\ndecision of the coordinate bench in case of DCIT vs Shivali Mahajan\nin ITA No. 5585/DEL/2015 vide order dated 19.03.2019.\n\n6.\nThe Id. DR on the other hand, relied heavily on the order of Id. AO\nand

USHASHREE DEVI,BHAGALPUR vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 42/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ushashree Devi, Sabjee Chowk, Barari, Bhagalpur - 812003 [Pan: Aeppd6663K] ……….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patna – 1, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna - 800001 ............…..........................…..…..... Respondent

reassessment proceedings are bad and ab initio void being based on return of income filed on 19/08/2018 filed under section 142(1) of the Act as the AO has wrongly stated that the same was filed in response to notice under section 147 which was, in fact, filed on 31/01/2019. I.T.A. No. 42/Pat/2021 Ushashree Devi 8. For that

UPAM SHREE,BHAGALPUR vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 40/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Upam Shree, C/O Ashok Kumar Mandal, Sabjee Chowk, Barari, Bhagalpur - 812003 [Pan: Ecfps5292P] ……….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patna – 1, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna - 800001 ............…..........................…..…..... Respondent

reassessment proceedings are bad and ab initio void being based on return of income filed on 19/08/2018 filed under section 142(1) of the Act as the AO has wrongly stated that the same was filed in response to notice under section 147 which was, in fact, filed on 31/01/2019. 10. For that the CIT (A) erred in confirming

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

69A read with section 115BBE of the Act and assessed the same under the Act. 10. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer, without giving any opportunity, much less sufficient opportunity, has erred in holding that the opening balance of Proprietor's Capital (being the closing balance as on 31/03/2015

RAMESHWARI AGRO SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.187&188/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Rameshwari Agro Services Pvt. Ltd.…..…………………....Appellant C/O Lakshman Prasad & Kamlesh Kr. Yadav (Directors), Jai Gurudev Automobile, Gaya Road, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, Bihar-824113. [Pan: Aahcr9701K] Vs. Nfac, Delhi…………………….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhi Sarkar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 24, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Dated 29.07.24 & 31.07.24 Passed By The Nfac ["Cit(A)"]. Since The Issues Involved In Ita Nos.187 & 188/Patna/2025 For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Are Identical Except For Figures & Assessment Years, Both Appeals Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, The Facts Are First Taken From Ita No.187/Patna/2025. 2. Ita No. 187/Patna/ 2025 - A.Y. 2017-18 - Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Did Not File Its Return Of Income For The Assessment

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144, by treating the entire deposit of Rs.5,17,1450 as unexplained money under Section 69A

RAMESHWARI AGRO SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.187&188/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Rameshwari Agro Services Pvt. Ltd.…..…………………....Appellant C/O Lakshman Prasad & Kamlesh Kr. Yadav (Directors), Jai Gurudev Automobile, Gaya Road, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, Bihar-824113. [Pan: Aahcr9701K] Vs. Nfac, Delhi…………………….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhi Sarkar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 24, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Dated 29.07.24 & 31.07.24 Passed By The Nfac ["Cit(A)"]. Since The Issues Involved In Ita Nos.187 & 188/Patna/2025 For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Are Identical Except For Figures & Assessment Years, Both Appeals Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, The Facts Are First Taken From Ita No.187/Patna/2025. 2. Ita No. 187/Patna/ 2025 - A.Y. 2017-18 - Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Did Not File Its Return Of Income For The Assessment

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144, by treating the entire deposit of Rs.5,17,1450 as unexplained money under Section 69A

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceedings are bad in law in the absence of reasons recorded for issuing a reopening notice under section 148 of the Act being furnished to the assessee when sought for. It is axiomatic that power to reopen a completed assessment under the Act is an exceptional power and whenever revenue seeks to exercise such power, they must strictly comply

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceedings are bad in law in the absence of reasons recorded for issuing a reopening notice under section 148 of the Act being furnished to the assessee when sought for. It is axiomatic that power to reopen a completed assessment under the Act is an exceptional power and whenever revenue seeks to exercise such power, they must strictly comply

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

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

reassessment\nis passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory\nrequirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is\nnot meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with\nthe finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was\ngranted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional\nCIT resulting in vitiating

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

reassessment\nis passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory\nrequirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is\nnot meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with\nthe finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was\ngranted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional\nCIT resulting in vitiating

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

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

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

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 PATNA, PATNA vs. LOVELY RANI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD , PATNA

reassessment\nis passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory\nrequirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is\nnot meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with\nthe finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was\ngranted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional\nCIT resulting in vitiating

LOVELY RANI CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, PATNA

REASSESSMENT\nIS PASSED PURSUANT TO A SEARCH OPERATION IS A MANDATORY\nREQUIREMENT OF SECTION 153D OF THE ACT AND THAT SUCH APPROVAL IS\nNOT MEANT TO BE GIVEN MECHANICALLY. THE COURT ALSO CONCURS WITH\nTHE FINDING OF THE ITAT THAT IN THE PRESENT CASES SUCH APPROVAL WAS\nGRANTED MECHANICALLY WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE ADDITIONAL\nCIT RESULTING IN VITIATING

SUSHIL KUMAR KANODIA,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp2484B Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Respondent) (Appellant) Sushil Kumar Kanodia N-601, Profesor Colony, Acit, Central Circle-2 Chitragupta Nagar, Kanakrbagh, Vs. Patna, Bihar Patna-800020, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agypk0702D Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2025

reassessment under sections 148 & 147/148. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of DCIT vs Shivali Mahajan in ITA No. 5585/DEL/2015 vide order dated 19.03.2019. 6. The ld. DR on the other hand, relied heavily on the order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. PATNA IRON PVT. LTD., PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp2484B Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Respondent) (Appellant) Sushil Kumar Kanodia N-601, Profesor Colony, Acit, Central Circle-2 Chitragupta Nagar, Kanakrbagh, Vs. Patna, Bihar Patna-800020, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agypk0702D Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2025

reassessment under sections 148 & 147/148. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of DCIT vs Shivali Mahajan in ITA No. 5585/DEL/2015 vide order dated 19.03.2019. 6. The ld. DR on the other hand, relied heavily on the order

ARCHANA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 4 (1), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding has been initiated for making roving and fishing enquiry. The order of assessment as sustained u/s 147 rws 144 rws 144B is arbitrary, unjustified, without jurisdiction, void ab-initio, bad in law, vitiated in law and invalid. The order as passed u/s 147 is fit to be quashed / cancel / annulled. 1.2 For that the order of the assessment