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

u/s 148(2) of the Act. We note that in assessment proceedings which culminated under section 143(3) order dated 31.03.2016 the AO did not examine this issue of commission payment. In the reopened assessment under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act as finalised vide order dated 31.12.2018, this issue did not come to the notice

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

u/s 148(2) of the Act. We note that in assessment proceedings which culminated under section 143(3) order dated 31.03.2016 the AO did not examine this issue of commission payment. In the reopened assessment under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act as finalised vide order dated 31.12.2018, this issue did not come to the notice

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

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

KUMAR ARUNOSAYA,PATNA vs. A.O., CIRCLE-6, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

KUMAR ARUNODAYA,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 6, PATNA [NEW – DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, PATNA], PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

13. ITA No. 94/Pat/2020 (Revenue) & CO No. 03/Pat/2021(Assessee) for AY 2012-13 The only issue raised by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) quashing the assessment on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) was served to the assessee before completing assessment proceedings. 14. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return

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

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

reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub--section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment as referred to in sub--section (1), as the case may be.] (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254 or section

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

reassessment order by issuance of a notice under section 148(a) of the Income Tax Act. At first instance, the assessee thought that there was no need to file the appeal, but later on when it consulted with ld. Sr. Counsel, it was advised to file an appeal. In that process, the delay of 14 days had occurred. The assessee

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

reassessment order by issuance of a notice under section 148(a) of the Income Tax Act. At first instance, the assessee thought that there was no need to file the appeal, but later on when it consulted with ld. Sr. Counsel, it was advised to file an appeal. In that process, the delay of 14 days had occurred. The assessee

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

reassessment order by issuance of a notice under section 148(a) of the Income Tax Act. At first instance, the assessee thought that there was no need to file the appeal, but later on when it consulted with ld. Sr. Counsel, it was advised to file an appeal. In that process, the delay of 14 days had occurred. The assessee

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

13 of 19 I.T.A. No.: 304/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjeet Singh. issuing any notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. The provisions of section u/s 143(2) of the Act are as under: “143(2) Where a return has been furnished under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, the Assessing

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

13. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. As far as the first fold of the dispute is concerned, whether addition under section 153A in the absence of any discovery of incriminating material could be made or not is concerned, we are of the view that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has silenced this

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

13. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. As far as the first fold of the dispute is concerned, whether addition under section 153A in the absence of any discovery of incriminating material could be made or not is concerned, we are of the view that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has silenced this

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

13. The issue which needs adjudication is that where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued to assessee, can the assessment be completed under section 143(3) of the Act? Further, whether in the circumstances where no return of income has been filed and no notice under section 143(2) of the Act could

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

13. The issue which needs adjudication is that where no notice under section 143(2) of the Act has been issued to assessee, can the assessment be completed under section 143(3) of the Act? Further, whether in the circumstances where no return of income has been filed and no notice under section 143(2) of the Act could

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

reassessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 02.08.2016 by making the following additions/disallowances: (a) Corporate Social Responsibility u/s 37(1) of the Act: ₹30,52,571/- (b) Interest on TDS: ₹46,190/- (c) Deduction on 'Other Income' claimed u/s 801A: ₹66,47,34,169/- The total income of the assessee was thus assessed

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

reassessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 02.08.2016 by making the following additions/disallowances: (a) Corporate Social Responsibility u/s 37(1) of the Act: ₹30,52,571/- (b) Interest on TDS: ₹46,190/- (c) Deduction on 'Other Income' claimed u/s 801A: ₹66,47,34,169/- The total income of the assessee was thus assessed