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

8. Having heard the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, we note that the assessment under section 143(3) was framed vide order dated 31.03.2016 though the issue of payment of commission was admittedly not enquired/investigated by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. Thereafter the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer under section

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

8. Having heard the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, we note that the assessment under section 143(3) was framed vide order dated 31.03.2016 though the issue of payment of commission was admittedly not enquired/investigated by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. Thereafter the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer under section

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

8. On the other hand, ld. D.R. vehemently argued supporting the order of ld. CIT(Appeals). 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. Validity of notice under section 148 and reopening proceedings under section 147 of the Act are in challenge before us. The crux of the submissions of ld. Counsel

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

8. Through Ground No. 1 & 2, the assessee has challenged the finding of the ld. CIT(A) holding that there is no direct nexus between the interest paid on security deposit and interest bearing assets and the ld. CIT(A) has also erred in not considering deduction of 90% of interest while working out deduction u/s 80HHC. We find that

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

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

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. 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

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 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

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

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 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

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

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

147, 148 and 149, in the 1961 Act. A clear distinction has been made out between " issue of notice" and "service of notice" under the 1,961 Act. Section 149 prescribes the period of limitation. It categorically prescribes that no notice under section 148 shall be issued after the prescribed limitation has lapsed Section 148(1) provides for service