DEEPAK SHRAWAN BUDHIA,MUMBAI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF I.T., PATNA-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

24,861/- in which he observed that that as per section 40(a)(ia) of the Act the AO has not disallowed the certain payments made towards freight charges are covered under the TDS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. NORTH BIHAR POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and COs of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

24,383/- as undisclosed contractual payments. 5.3.1 In its reply, the appellant has stated that Bajaj Electricals Ltd is one of its suppliers and it gives advances to it. It has received interest from Bajaj Electricals Ltd on the advance paid and the same has been duly accounted for in the books of accounts as interest income. It is contended

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S ASHA REALTY DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

24,102\n3,84,34,500\n10,10,398\nSmriti\nB.L.\n27.12%\n22355\n7641\n34.18\n1,79,05,051\n65,21,687\n2,40,47,530\n1,75,25,843\nSinghania\nAsha\n22.11%\n46165\n8754\n18.98\n19069421\nNil\n2,11,58,000\n2,11,58,000\nVihar Ph-\nIII\n3,96,94,241\n\n3.2. The learned AO made

CHINMASTIKA SIDHARTHA(JV),PATNA vs. CIT(A), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz)

24,00,832/- (Rs.2,29,28,180/- minus TDS Rs.5,27,348/-) to first party and Rs.6,92,809/- (Rs.7,09,119/- minus TDS Rs.16,310/-) to second party. As the assessee failed to produce the relevant details and documents in support of the books of account of JV, therefore, there was no alternative in the hands of ld. Assessing

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 69A of the Act and the judicial pronouncement in the case of Chuharmal vs. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC) and made an addition of ₹1,25,24,480/- u/s 69A of the Act for the cash deposits in the bank account maintained with the Bank of Baroda which remained unexplained. An addition of ₹4,35,720/- appearing

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 69A of the Act and the judicial pronouncement in the case of Chuharmal vs. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC) and made an addition of ₹1,25,24,480/- u/s 69A of the Act for the cash deposits in the bank account maintained with the Bank of Baroda which remained unexplained. An addition of ₹4,35,720/- appearing

ASHOK KUMAR,BHOJPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, ARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

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

24, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : April 10, 2024 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income 1 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Ashok Kumar Tax (Appeals)-1, Patna dated 19th July, 2018 passed

ARANYA CLEARERS,GAYA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), GAYA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Ld. Assessing Officer has determined the taxable income of the assessee at Rs.61,50,860/-. He made three additions to the income of the assessee. The computation made at the end of the assessment order reads as under:- Total income as per return Rs.8,24,100/- Addition: (i)Contract receipt/fees Rs.7

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 271(1)(b) for non-compliance of the notices at the end of the assessee. Ultimately the ld. Assessing Officer gone through the books of account submitted before her and made these two additions by recording the following finding:- “Addition u/s 40A(3) for payments exceeding Rs.20,000/- through bearer cheques:- On perusal of Books

UTTAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK,MUZAFFARPUR vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.186/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank……….....…..…………………....Appellant Sharma Complex, Ramna Kalambagh Chowk, Muzaffarpur, Bihar – 842002. [Pan: Aaaju0238J] Vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-2, Muzaffarpur.……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 23, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna ["Cit(A)"] For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring A Total Loss Of Rs.47,24,77,982. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Compulsory Manual Selection Criteria During The Financial Year 2017-18. Accordingly, Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Were Issued & Duly Served Upon The Assessee. In Response, The Assessee Appeared & Made Certain Submissions. However, The Assessing Officer Made The Following Additions/Disallowances: Rs.16,84,20,016: Provision For Npa.

24,77,982. The case was selected for scrutiny under compulsory manual selection criteria during the financial year 2017-18. Accordingly, statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") were issued and duly served upon the assessee. In response, the assessee appeared and made certain submissions. However, the Assessing Officer made

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. YASHI FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

24,92,710/-. In response to the notices issued, the assessee responded before the Ld. AO that during the year under consideration it was engaged in the business of producing feature films, selling and purchasing satellite rights, producing music, producing serials, producing web series, managing events, etc. and had made several payments to its artists engaged directly in the production

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,PATNA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 76/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises,………………………..........Appellant C/O. Nirmal & Associates, Nepali Kothi, Opposite Gasoline Petrol Pump, Boring Road, Patna-800001 [Pan:Aarfs8853J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Patna,…………………………………..……………..Respondent, Bihar-800001 Appearances By: Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 5Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 8Th, 2024 O R D E R

24. Please furnish ledgers of expenses made during the year under the heads - rent of Rs. 1,17,70,210/- with copy of rent agreement, whether TDS has been deducted thereon, sub contract and site expenses of Rs. 20,15,02,121/-, repairs to machinery of Rs.2,30,73,982/-,and nature and details of royalty paid of Rs.5

BBCPL-RCPL (JV),JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

24, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : April 17, 2024 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Principal Commissioner 1 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 BBCPL- RCPL (JV) of Income Tax (Central), Patna dated 31st March, 2023 passed under section

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 of the Act, on a misconception of law and without proper application of mind to the facts and to the circumstances of the case and the Appellant craves leave to distinguish the said case laws before or during the hearing of the Appeal. Page 5 of 56 I.T.A. Nos. 322-329/Pat/2024, Nalanda Engicon

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 of the Act, on a misconception of law and without proper application of mind to the facts and to the circumstances of the case and the Appellant craves leave to distinguish the said case laws before or during the hearing of the Appeal. Page 5 of 56 I.T.A. Nos. 322-329/Pat/2024, Nalanda Engicon

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 of the Act, on a misconception of law and without proper application of mind to the facts and to the circumstances of the case and the Appellant craves leave to distinguish the said case laws before or during the hearing of the Appeal. Page 5 of 56 I.T.A. Nos. 322-329/Pat/2024, Nalanda Engicon

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 of the Act, on a misconception of law and without proper application of mind to the facts and to the circumstances of the case and the Appellant craves leave to distinguish the said case laws before or during the hearing of the Appeal. Page 5 of 56 I.T.A. Nos. 322-329/Pat/2024, Nalanda Engicon

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 of the Act, on a misconception of law and without proper application of mind to the facts and to the circumstances of the case and the Appellant craves leave to distinguish the said case laws before or during the hearing of the Appeal. Page 5 of 56 I.T.A. Nos. 322-329/Pat/2024, Nalanda Engicon