ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. M/S GAURAV RICE & FOOD PROCESSING PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

68 of the Act in respect of unexplained cash credit by the\nlearned Assessing Officer.\n03. The facts in brief are that a search action under Section 132 of the Act\nwas conducted on the assessee on 11.08.2017, at the residential\noffice and factory premises of the assessee after an information was\nreceived from the inspector of police, Alamganj

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]

48 taxman.com 120(Delhi-Trib.) In view of the above judgments, I hereby quash the assessment made on10.12.2019 ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice

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]

48 taxman.com 120(Delhi-Trib.) In view of the above judgments, I hereby quash the assessment made on10.12.2019 ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice

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]

48 taxman.com 120(Delhi-Trib.) In view of the above judgments, I hereby quash the assessment made on10.12.2019 ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice

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]

48 taxman.com 120(Delhi-Trib.) In view of the above judgments, I hereby quash the assessment made on10.12.2019 ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice

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]

48 taxman.com 120(Delhi-Trib.) In view of the above judgments, I hereby quash the assessment made on10.12.2019 ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya The A.R has further argued, that without prejudice to the illegal initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of Notice

PRERNA AGENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

48,10,396/- under Section 68 of the Act, after giving the benefit of opening cash balance of Rs. 23,22,604/-. 1.2 Before

SHARDINDU PRASAD SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68 days. An application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under: “The appellant filed this appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna on 30/10/24 after delay of 69 days. The main I.T.A. No.: 630/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shardindu Prasad Singh. reason of delay in filing of memorandum

RAJBANSH RAM,BHABUA vs. ITO WARD- 3(5), SASARAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68 of the Act, which is stated to be fit to be reversed on the ground that no valid show cause notice as mandated in section 251(2) of the Act was I.T.A. No.: 351/PAT/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rajbansh Ram. issued by the NFAC. Further, the entire transactions and the source of the bank deposits not being

NAGENDRA SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (3), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 272/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016

68,874/-, which attracts the provisions of section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and the capital gains arising out of such transfer as per provisions of sections 2(47)(v), 45 and 48

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

68 "it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the Page 8 of 19 I.T.A. No.: 304/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjeet Singh. identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". 8.4 Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal)], it was observed that

GYASUDDIN MOHAMMAD ANSARI,PURNIA vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (3), PURNEA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 80 E had been wrongly claimed. In fact, the assessee had sold a commercial is of land and furnish the working of capital loss of ₹ 240,000 and relied upon the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of gets a (India) Ltd vs CIT. The AO did not accept the contention of the assessee

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

48,82,334/- was already done by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the point No. 13 of the notice issued under the section 142(1) of the Act. 15. For that on the fact and in circumstances of the case, the Pr. CIT has erred in applying the sub-section (a) and (b) of the explanation

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

48,82,334/- was already done by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the point No. 13 of the notice issued under the section 142(1) of the Act. 15. For that on the fact and in circumstances of the case, the Pr. CIT has erred in applying the sub-section (a) and (b) of the explanation

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

48,82,334/- was already done by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the point No. 13 of the notice issued under the section 142(1) of the Act. 15. For that on the fact and in circumstances of the case, the Pr. CIT has erred in applying the sub-section (a) and (b) of the explanation

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

48,82,334/- was already done by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the point No. 13 of the notice issued under the section 142(1) of the Act. 15. For that on the fact and in circumstances of the case, the Pr. CIT has erred in applying the sub-section (a) and (b) of the explanation

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

48,82,334/- was already done by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the point No. 13 of the notice issued under the section 142(1) of the Act. 15. For that on the fact and in circumstances of the case, the Pr. CIT has erred in applying the sub-section (a) and (b) of the explanation

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

48,82,334/- was already done by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the point No. 13 of the notice issued under the section 142(1) of the Act. 15. For that on the fact and in circumstances of the case, the Pr. CIT has erred in applying the sub-section (a) and (b) of the explanation

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

48,82,334/- was already done by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the point No. 13 of the notice issued under the section 142(1) of the Act. 15. For that on the fact and in circumstances of the case, the Pr. CIT has erred in applying the sub-section (a) and (b) of the explanation