SANTOSH KUMAR KESHRI,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 226/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Santosh Kumar Keshri,………..…….…………Appellant Shop No. 3, Jaiswal Market, Sabji Mandi, Mithapur-800001, Bihar [Pan:Asapk1127E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,...Respondent Dc/Ac Circle-6, Patna-800001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Supriya Sharma, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

section 68 can be done, is unfair and harsh and not equitable in law, hence liable to be set aside. 5. That the assessee reserves his right to urge any other ground, submission and or citation circulars/notifications/judicial or quasi- judicial pronouncements/judgements etc. at the time of further hearing and We pray for the admissibility of it with your learned

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

64 taxmann.com 313 (SC).” 2. In the case of ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) – Judgement dated 22.10.2014 the commissioner gave the approval u/s 151 to the proposal u/s 148 by stating "Approved" and putting his signature. The Jurisdictional Delhi Bench of ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the reopening was bad-in- law for the reason that

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

64 taxmann.com 313 (SC).” 2. In the case of ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) – Judgement dated 22.10.2014 the commissioner gave the approval u/s 151 to the proposal u/s 148 by stating "Approved" and putting his signature. The Jurisdictional Delhi Bench of ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the reopening was bad-in- law for the reason that

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

64 taxmann.com 313 (SC).” 2. In the case of ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) – Judgement dated 22.10.2014 the commissioner gave the approval u/s 151 to the proposal u/s 148 by stating "Approved" and putting his signature. The Jurisdictional Delhi Bench of ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the reopening was bad-in- law for the reason that

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

64 taxmann.com 313 (SC).” 2. In the case of ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) – Judgement dated 22.10.2014 the commissioner gave the approval u/s 151 to the proposal u/s 148 by stating "Approved" and putting his signature. The Jurisdictional Delhi Bench of ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the reopening was bad-in- law for the reason that

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

64 taxmann.com 313 (SC).” 2. In the case of ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) – Judgement dated 22.10.2014 the commissioner gave the approval u/s 151 to the proposal u/s 148 by stating "Approved" and putting his signature. The Jurisdictional Delhi Bench of ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the reopening was bad-in- law for the reason that

MITHILESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

68 to 69D read with Section 115BBE, by colouring the "deemed incomes" as business income. More so, in cases of unaccounted cash and undisclosed investment/expenditure in purchases, and excess stock assessable under section 69A/69B/69C of the Act. 3.2.1. At the outset, all the decisions quoted and relied upon by the assessee, with regard to non-applicability of Section

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]

68,566/- to the income of the assessee in assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31.03.2016 on the basis that according to rent controller order , the revised rent is effective from 27.07.2012. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of AO. 5. After hearing

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]

68,566/- to the income of the assessee in assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31.03.2016 on the basis that according to rent controller order , the revised rent is effective from 27.07.2012. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of AO. 5. After hearing

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]

68,566/- to the income of the assessee in assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31.03.2016 on the basis that according to rent controller order , the revised rent is effective from 27.07.2012. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of AO. 5. After hearing

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]

68,566/- to the income of the assessee in assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31.03.2016 on the basis that according to rent controller order , the revised rent is effective from 27.07.2012. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of AO. 5. After hearing

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]

68,566/- to the income of the assessee in assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 31.03.2016 on the basis that according to rent controller order , the revised rent is effective from 27.07.2012. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of AO. 5. After hearing

ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRABHAT,ARRAH vs. PCIT-1, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68 of the Act. On going through the order of the Ld. AO, the ld. Pr. CIT noticed on examining the case of the assessee that the Ld. AO completed the assessment without making proper enquiry and verifications. Accordingly, the proceeding u/s 263 of the Act was initiated and an opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee vide

KUMAR SUMAN SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

64,000/-\non account of low withdrawal for A.Y. 2001-02. The ground is partly\nallowed.\"\n11.1 We, after examining the facts of the case and submission made by\nthe ld. DR, find that the ld. CIT(A) while passing the impugned order\ndiscussed the facts of the issue at length and allowed partial relief to the\nassessee @ Rs.2750

SURAJ NIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), PATNA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.240/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Suraj Nirman Pvt. Ltd...…………………...........................……….……Appellant 202, Kaushalya Estate Dak Bunglow, Patna, Bihar – 800001. [Pan: Aaecs9454K] Vs. Cit(A), Patna…………....……...…………………………………....…..Respondent

68 of the Act after disbelieving the explanation submitted by the assessee. 1.1 Before the ld. CIT(A), it is seen that the assessee did not make any compliance to as many as four notices issued fixing dates for hearing. Needless to say, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the absence

SITARAM SULTANIA,PATNA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIR-6, PATNA, PATNA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

64 lakhs. As per the in- formation gathered by the AO from Stamp Valuation Authority, the value of the immovable property was determined at Rs. 1,20,00,000/-. Accord- ingly, the case of the assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Act by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act. The assessee computed Short Term

FARIDI FOUNDATION,ARRAH vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PATNA

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

68, 22, 353, 242 and so\nmany others like these. All the sums claimed to have been taken in cash.\nGoing through the list it appears the name \"Muhammad Jugnu Khan\" with\nPage | 4\nΙ.Τ.Α. No.: 223/PAT/2023\n Assessment Year: 2023-24\nFaridi Foundation.\nsame address and mobile number and sum of Rs.193/-, Rs.60/- & Rs.91/-\nclaimed to have

PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee

PIYUSH & ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee