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

transfer of Long Term Capital Assets being an equity share in a company or a unit of an equity oriented fund, on which STT is paid, is exempt from taxation point of view. These beneficiary provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been misused by the syndicates to arrange accommodation entry of bogus Long Term Capital Gain through trading

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

transfer of Long Term Capital Assets being an equity share in a company or a unit of an equity oriented fund, on which STT is paid, is exempt from taxation point of view. These beneficiary provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been misused by the syndicates to arrange accommodation entry of bogus Long Term Capital Gain through trading

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

transfer of Long Term Capital Assets being an equity share in a company or a unit of an equity oriented fund, on which STT is paid, is exempt from taxation point of view. These beneficiary provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been misused by the syndicates to arrange accommodation entry of bogus Long Term Capital Gain through trading

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

transfer of Long Term Capital Assets being an equity share in a company or a unit of an equity oriented fund, on which STT is paid, is exempt from taxation point of view. These beneficiary provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been misused by the syndicates to arrange accommodation entry of bogus Long Term Capital Gain through trading

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

transfer of Long Term Capital Assets being an equity share in a company or a unit of an equity oriented fund, on which STT is paid, is exempt from taxation point of view. These beneficiary provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been misused by the syndicates to arrange accommodation entry of bogus Long Term Capital Gain through trading

XAVIERS CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,PATNA vs. ITO WARD- 2 (2), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 349/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Xaviers Construction Pvt. Limited,....……Appellant House No. 239, Lodipur, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Aaacx0342D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-2(2), Patna Appearances By: Shri Anjan Biswas, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: February 13, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: March 21, 2025 O R D E R

price of Rs.13,48,000/- on 12.02.2010. The ld. Assessing Officer further mentioned that as per the information available on record, the appellant has sold the flat bearing Flat No. 204 at Ram Shyam Apartment for a consideration of Rs.25,79,477/-, which has not been included in the sale consideration. The appellant had entered into sale agreement with

MOHAMMAD SAIDULLAH,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (3), MOTIHARI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

price and, therefore, there was no question of any addition under section 56(2)(x) of the Act. As regards the disallowance made on account of expenses claimed on estimated basis, the assessee contended that the Ld. AO had ignored the facts and nature of business and, therefore, the addition should be deleted. Thereafter

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. SH. SURESH , PATNA

transfer of lands as arose to the assesse. (ii) Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding Rupam Tower as Residential House and has erred in allowing deduction u/s 54 to the LTCG arising to the assessee. (iii) Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting the claim of the assessee regarding the cost of construction of the Rupam Tower building. He also erred