M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

penalty U/s 271(1)(c). 6. For that other grounds in details will be argued at the time of hearing." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant company, a public sector undertaking (PSU) and a subsidiary company of M/s Coal India Ltd (CIL), is engaged in coal mining and a few ancillary jobs. The appellant company

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

penalty U/s 271(1)(c). 6. For that other grounds in details will be argued at the time of hearing." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant company, a public sector undertaking (PSU) and a subsidiary company of M/s Coal India Ltd (CIL), is engaged in coal mining and a few ancillary jobs. The appellant company

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

penalty U/s 271(1)(c). 6. For that other grounds in details will be argued at the time of hearing." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant company, a public sector undertaking (PSU) and a subsidiary company of M/s Coal India Ltd (CIL), is engaged in coal mining and a few ancillary jobs. The appellant company

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

penalty U/s 271(1)(c). 6. For that other grounds in details will be argued at the time of hearing." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant company, a public sector undertaking (PSU) and a subsidiary company of M/s Coal India Ltd (CIL), is engaged in coal mining and a few ancillary jobs. The appellant company

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

penalty U/s 271(1)(c). 6. For that other grounds in details will be argued at the time of hearing." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant company, a public sector undertaking (PSU) and a subsidiary company of M/s Coal India Ltd (CIL), is engaged in coal mining and a few ancillary jobs. The appellant company

M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

penalty U/s 271(1)(c). 6. For that other grounds in details will be argued at the time of hearing." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant company, a public sector undertaking (PSU) and a subsidiary company of M/s Coal India Ltd (CIL), is engaged in coal mining and a few ancillary jobs. The appellant company

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI, RANCHI vs. SHRI KAMAL BHUSHAN, RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

U/s 271(1)(c) r.w Expl 5A are being separately initiated for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income." No specific reason was mentioned by AO against the addition made nor was there any discussion made by AO regarding penalty proceedings upon the disclosure made. As such, the order imposing penalty

MANISH KUMAR SAGU(HUF),RANCHI vs. ACIT, C.C.-2, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.26/Ran/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manish Kumar Sahu (Huf)..…...………………......................……...…..….. Appellant 201, Krishna Apartment, Ratu Road, Ranchi-834001. [Pan: Aaghm3591N] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Ranchi…..…..………..…….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28 , 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.01.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that a search and seizure

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Ran/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Padam Kumar Jain Vs. Cit, Central, Cr Building, Beer Chand Patel Marg, Patna – 800001. Ratanlalsurajmal Compound, Main Road, Ranchi – 834001, Jharkhand "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abrpj 0001 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

search & seizure operation was not related to the assessee only, but also his family members, companies and firms in which they were partners or directors. But the documentary evidence (L) No. 46 of statement recorded u/s 132(4) reflects a different picture. The same is reproduced here: Padam Kumar Jain Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sl. No. For the Financial Year

M/S RAM SWARUP RUNGTA & BROTHERS,RANCHI vs. DCIT, RANCHI

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA

271 of the Act does not specify the charge of offence committed by the assessee viz whether had concealed the particulars of income or had furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Hence the said notice is to be held as defective. 8. Further, we find that Revenue had preferred a SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against this judgment which

RAMESH KUMAR SINGH,RANCHI vs. PR. CIT(C), PATNA, PATNA

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

u/s 263 on simply change of opinion and only for re-verification. 5. For that other grounds, if any, will be argued/taken up at the time of hearing." 2. Facts in brief are that a search and seizure operation was conducted by the Income Tax Department under Section 132(1) of the Act in the business and residential premises

RAMESH KUMAR SINGH,RANCHI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PATNA, RANCHI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

u/s 263 on simply change of opinion and only for re-verification. 5. For that other grounds, if any, will be argued/taken up at the time of hearing." 2. Facts in brief are that a search and seizure operation was conducted by the Income Tax Department under Section 132(1) of the Act in the business and residential premises

PR. CIT (C), PATNA, PATNA vs. RAMESH KUMAR SINGH, RANCHI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

u/s 263 on simply change of opinion and only for re-verification. 5. For that other grounds, if any, will be argued/taken up at the time of hearing." 2. Facts in brief are that a search and seizure operation was conducted by the Income Tax Department under Section 132(1) of the Act in the business and residential premises