KRISHNA MOHAN ,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-14, PATNA , PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Krishna Mohan Prop-M/S Maa Ambey Traders, Acit, Circle-14, Patna Maurari Complex, Karbigahiya, Patna, Bihar Vs. Patna-800001, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahupm5205C Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Md. Ah Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2025

46A of the IT Rules, 1962 as the certificate submitted by the assessee is clarificatory in nature which was submitted to substantiate the submission made by the assessee in this regard. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Karnataka High Court by the case of Shankar Khandasari Sugar Mills Vs. CIT reported

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. BIHAR TRADE TOWER(JV), PATNA

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.105/Pat/2020 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Circle-1, Patna ……………………………..........................……….……Appellant Vs. Bihar Trade Tower (Jv), Patna....……...…………………………………....…..Respondent 46/46, Patliputra Colony, Near Sahyog Hospital, Patna, Bihar – 800013. [Pan: Aacab0114D]

46A(3) of the I.T Rules. iii) Any other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. Before us, the ld. DR took us through the Assessing Officer’s findings and vehemently argued that the assessee had provided inadequate documentation to establish the application of section 68

ANIL KUMAR,CHAPRA SARAN vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, CHHAPRA

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

68,850/-. Admittedly, this order was an\nexparte order since the assessee did not make any presentation of facts\nbefore the Ld. AO.\n1.2 Aggrieved with the action of Ld. AO, the assessee approached the Ld.\nCIT(A), where also he could not succeed because some new evidence that\nhe filed at that stage were not admitted for adjudication since

VINAYAK BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 64 & 65/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Vinayak Builders & Acit, Central Circle-03, Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Loknayak Bhawan, 101, Vaidhnath Apartment, 3Rd Floor, Frazer Road, Road No.03, Mahesh Nagar, Patna-800 001 Patna-800 024 [Pan :Aadcv1223G] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section 144 vide order even dated 28.03.2014. 2. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that there was no appearance before the ld. AO and best judgement ITA Nos.64 & 65/PAT/2023 Vinayak Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2012-13 assessment has been framed u/s 144 of the Act for the impugned assessment year. Further, assessee could

VINAYAK BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 64 & 65/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Vinayak Builders & Acit, Central Circle-03, Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Loknayak Bhawan, 101, Vaidhnath Apartment, 3Rd Floor, Frazer Road, Road No.03, Mahesh Nagar, Patna-800 001 Patna-800 024 [Pan :Aadcv1223G] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section 144 vide order even dated 28.03.2014. 2. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that there was no appearance before the ld. AO and best judgement ITA Nos.64 & 65/PAT/2023 Vinayak Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2012-13 assessment has been framed u/s 144 of the Act for the impugned assessment year. Further, assessee could

MANI BHUSHAN KUMAR,PATNA vs. CIT, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 147 when there is no failure on part of the appellant to disclose the material facts and particulars of the case. 6. For that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering the fact that the reasons recorded by Assessing Officer has been erroneous and the assessment order passed is illegal, void ab initio

SHREE SHREE DWARIKAJI FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. DC/AC, CIRCLE-2, PATNA

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 147 of the Act and added an amount of Rs. 46,00,000/- on account of alleged share application money received from one M/s Glorious Holdings Pvt. Ltd. It is a matter of record that the Ld. AO made several attempts to verify the genuineness of the transaction but due to non-cooperation by the assessee, the same

AMIT KUMAR,BEGUSARAI vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 143(3) r.w. 144 of the Income tax Act, 1961, ('the Act') at an income of Rs 3,74,76,426/- as against returned income of Rs 10,16,880/- ITA No.: 410/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Amit Kumar. 2. For that the learned has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case in arbitrarily confirming addition