DULU MAHATO,DHANBAD vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

property at Rs.55 lakhs and apportioned the said estimated cost between two years at Rs.27.5 lakhs each. It was the submission that the house

DULU MAHATO,DHANBAD vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

property at Rs.55 lakhs and apportioned the said estimated cost between two years at Rs.27.5 lakhs each. It was the submission that the house

DR. SANJAY KUMAR,RANCHI vs. PR. CIT, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

house property. The return of income was filed on 23.12.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 6,41,280/-. The case

GITA KUMARI,RANCHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

property by applying CPWD rate. However the house is situated at Ranchi and therefore as against CPWD rates

VISHWANATH PRASAD VISHWKARMA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(4), JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: BEFORES/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

house property on 27.7.2012. It was the submission that the sale consideration of the property was Rs.3

SRI DHRUB NARAYAN PARIHAST,DEOGHAR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), DEOGHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: S/ S/Hri George Mathan & Ratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year : 2009-2010 Sri Dhrub Narayan Parihast, Sri Dhrub Narayan Parihast, Vs. Income Tax Office, Ward- Income Tax Office, Ward S/O. S/O. Shri Shri Deo Deo Narayan Narayan 3(1), Deoghar Parihast, Parihast, Dhanuk Dhanuk Tola, Tola, Jousagarhi, Deoghar. Jousagarhi, Deoghar. Pan/Gir No. .Bmrpp 9353 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv Poddar, Adv Revenue By : Shri Khub Chand Pandya,, Ld Sr Dr Revenue By , Ld Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/08/202 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/08/2 2025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Ord This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Ord Cit(A), Cit(A), Dhanbad Dhanbad Dated 19.9.2019 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Dhanbad/10147/2016 Dhanbad/10147/2016-17 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar, Shri Devesh Poddar, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Khub Chand Pandya, Ld Sr Dr Ld Sr Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

house property during the calender year 2009- & 2010. He has also invested in land in the name of his mother

BIJOY KUMAR AGARWAL,RANCHI vs. ACIT/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarmaandshri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountantmember

house property. The assessee also declared Long-Term Capital Gain of ₹30,55,833, claimed as exempt, arising

ACIT CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD vs. SRI VIKASH AGARWAL, DHANBAD

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

house property. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed from the ACIT Vs Sri Vikash Agarwal audit

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

house property, capital gain and other sources. Original return was filed on 14.09.2011, reporting a total income of Rs.19

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1),, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

house property, capital gain and other sources. Original return was filed on 14.09.2011, reporting a total income of Rs.19

SRI RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR SUKESH KUMAR,RANCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No.194/Ran/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sri Ramakrishnan Nair Sukesh Kumar.…...…..................……...…..….. Appellant Quarter No.R I/1, Birla Institute Of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi-835215. [Pan: Abtpk1985G] Vs. Acit, Circle-3, Ranchi…..……………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Ku. Koley , Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 23, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 07, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.02.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

property and earned capital gains of Rs.73,21,565/-. The assessee invested a sum of Rs.75 lakhs for purchasing a new under construction house

SUDHIR KUMAR JHA,BOKARO STEEL CITY vs. ACIT OR DCIT, CIRCLE-3, BOKARO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

house in Bokaro before retirement in 2017\nThe amount given shall be accounted for at the time of division of property

M/S MANIKARAN POWER LTD,RANCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayit(Ss)A No. 01/Ran/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) A.C.I.T., Manikaran Power Limited, Central Circle-2, Manikaran Tower, Kilburn Colony, Vs. Ranchi. P.O. Hinoo, Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) J.C.I.T. (In Situ), Pan No. Aaecm 4555 F Ranchi. Revenue/ Appellant Respondent/ Assessee Manikaran Power Limited, A.C.I.T., Manikaran Tower, Kilburn Colony, Central Circle-2, Vs. P.O. Hinoo, Ranchi-834002 Ranchi. (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaecm 4555 F Revenue/ Appellant Respondent/ Assessee

properties which were rented to the assessee and the same was disallowed under Section 37(1) of the Act. It was a submissions that on appeal, the ld. CIT(A) held that in respect of the issue of bogus purchases, the same could not be considered under Section 68 of the Act and the same was liable

MISRILALL JAIN & SONS,SINGHBHUM WEST vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.468/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Misrilall Jain & Sons….…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant M. D. House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [Pan: Aabfm2851Q] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 30.07.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [PAN: AABFM2851Q] vs. ACIT, CC-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : December 18, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : January 21, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member