ASHOK KUMAR MALHOTRA,DHANBAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), DHANBAD

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy)

house cannot convert agricultural land into non-agricultural land. She prayed for relief. 5. Rival contentions heard. On a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record and the case law cited, we hold as follows. 6. The ld. CIT(A) at the last paragraph of his order records the fact

M/S JOKHIRAM DURGADUTT,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1 , RNC

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.47/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Jokhiram Durgadutt, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi Sarawgi House, J.J.Road, Upper Bazar, Ranchi-834001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabfj 2200 Q (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.S.Paul, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.Cit(Dr)

143(3) and the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals ) of the Assessment year 2013 - 14 are enclosed as Annexure no: 1, 2, 3 and 4. Up to these Assessment Years these incomes were shown / treated and accepted as Income from House Property by the Ld. Assessing Officer and the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals ). Thus

SHRI SANJOG PRASAD,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-3(1), JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.109/Ran/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Shri Sanjog Prasad, Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), H.No.493, B-Block, Sonari, Jamshedpur Jamshedpur-831011 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Acupp 8930 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur, Dated 14.01.2019 Passed In First Appeal No.50/Jsr/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2012- 2013. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. For That The Assessment Being Completed U/S 147/143(3) Is Ab Initio Void & Illegal. The Subject Matter For The Initiation Of Proceeding U/S 147 Was Already Considered & Looked Into During The Course Of Scrutiny Assessment U/S 143(3). As Such, This Initiation Can Only Be Said To Be Change Of Opinion. As Such, Proceeding Being Initiated U/S 147 Is Ab Initio Void, Illegal & Fit To Be Deleted. 2. For That The Authorities Below Were Not Justified In Not Considering The Objection Raised By The Appellant Regarding The Initiation Of Proceeding U/S 147. There Was No Fresh Material Available On Record With The Ld. Ao To Suggest Any Escapement Of Income. As Such, The Proceeding Being Initiated Merely On Change Of Opinion Is Unjustified, Illegal & Fit To Be Deleted.

143(3). As such, this initiation can only be said to be change of opinion. As such, proceeding being initiated U/s 147 is ab initio void, illegal and fit to be deleted. 2. For that the authorities below were not justified in not considering the objection raised by the appellant regarding the initiation of proceeding U/s 147. There

SUNITA ADUKIA,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

2 | 17 ITA No.14 & 15/Ran/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (iv) For that the order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, treating the Long Term Capital Gains as Short Term Capital Gain is bad in law as well as in facts and against the Principles of natural justice and therefore liable to be set aside

SRI ANAND KUMAR DHANUKA ,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.163/Ran/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short the ‘Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance in the instant lis seeks to reverse both the lower authorities action disallowing section 54F deduction claim of Rs. 27,66,230/-. It is not in dispute that the assessee had invested the corresponding

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]

2 I.T.A. No.29/Ran/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dr. Sanjay Kumar 3. Facts in brief are that the assessee is a doctor and derives income from profession and house property. The return of income was filed on 23.12.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 6,41,280/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for limited scrutiny and the assessment

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

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2011–12 declaring a total income of ₹5,56,050, showing income from salary and house property. The assessee also declared Long-Term Capital Gain of ₹30,55,833, claimed as exempt, arising from sale of equity shares on which Securities

ASHOK BEHL,RANCHI vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Ashok Behl Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Ranchi 1St Floor, Samridhi Complex, South Office Para, Doranda, Ranchi – 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adwpb2438E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

2 Ashok Behl Assessment Year: 2014-15 3. Brief facts qua the issue are that the assessee is as individual and sold an immovable property, vide sale deed no. 6604 dated 23.11.2013 for a consideration of Rs.66,00,000/-. The assessee purchased the said property by way of an agreement dated 08.11.2009. However, the purchase agreement was registered

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: This

AMIT KUMAR SARAF ,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD-3(1) , BOKARO

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S.S.Godarai.T.A No.296/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Amit Kumar Saraf Vs. Ito, Wd-3(1), Bokaro C/O R.K. Doshi & Associates, Eastern Building, 1St Floor, 19, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kol-1. Pan/Gir No. : Asfps4134E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Case called twice. The assessee has filed his adjournment petition dated 28.03.2020. There is nobody to pursue the same, I proceed ex parte therefore. 2. It transpires from a perusal of the case file and with the able assistance of the learned departmental representative that the dispute between

SRI AJAY KUMAR ,HAZARIBAGH vs. ITO WARD-1(1), HAZARIBAGH

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.243/Ran/2016 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.207/Ran/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

House Dipugarha, Hazaribagh-825301. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AELPK 5256 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellantby :Shri M. K. Choudhry, Advocate Respondent by :Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 06/03/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year

SHRI AJAY KUMARS/O SHRI KISAN BHAGWAT,HAZARIBAGH vs. ITO WARD-2(5), HAZARIBAGH

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.243/Ran/2016 आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.207/Ran/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

House Dipugarha, Hazaribagh-825301. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AELPK 5256 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellantby :Shri M. K. Choudhry, Advocate Respondent by :Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 06/03/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year