VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, PATNA

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

77,540. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, determining total income at ₹14,14,46,876, by treating interest income of ₹4,82,69,336 as taxable, and denying deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal

VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, PATNA

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

77,540. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, determining total income at ₹14,14,46,876, by treating interest income of ₹4,82,69,336 as taxable, and denying deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal

VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

77,540. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, determining total income at ₹14,14,46,876, by treating interest income of ₹4,82,69,336 as taxable, and denying deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal

VAISHAL PATLIPUTRA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, PATNA

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

77,540. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, determining total income at ₹14,14,46,876, by treating interest income of ₹4,82,69,336 as taxable, and denying deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal

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

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of Government Civil Contractor & Sub-contractor and involved in the infrastructure development and maintenance such as roads, bridges, railways tunnels, etc. Income of Rs.4,25,44,130/- declared

MD. SABIR ALAM,KISHANGANJ vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

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

section 144B of the Act. 2. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR stated that there is delay of 77 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. On this aspect assessee had filed a petition praying for condonation

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits. P a g e 1 | 71 Assessment Year : 2010 -2011 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal” “1. For that the CIT(A) has erred in affirming the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s.143(3)/147 wherein the Assessing Officer has assessed

SANJEEV KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (1), PATNA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.264/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sanjeev Kumar...……………………………. …………………....Appellant Om Enterprises, Main Bazar, Bihta, Bihar- 801503. [Pan: Aswpk7096A] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(1), Patna……..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.01.2025 Passed By The Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 56 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

delay is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. I.T.A. No.264/Pat/2025 Sanjeev Kumar 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and for the assessment year 2014-15, the assessee filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs.5,53,810/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for Scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices

SANJAY KUMAR ,PATNA vs. ITO WARD-4(5) PATNA , PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. ITA No.: 343/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sanjay Kumar. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Appellate order of the National Faceless Appeals Centre (NFAC)- Delhi. Is bad and erroneous both on facts and in law. 2. The order

GANESH KUMAR KHEMKA,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

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

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Petition & The Submissions Made, We Are Satisfied That There Was Sufficient Cause For The Delay. Accordingly, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

delay is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2 Ganesh Kumar Khemka 3. Brief facts of the Case are that the Assessing Officer passed an order under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on 21.03.2022, determining the total income of the assessee at ₹77

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

condone the delay of 25 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. That the Hon'ble PCIT, Patna erred in appreciating the facts properly. 2. That the Hon'ble PCIT erred in treating the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer

M/S PARWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE TRUST,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

condone the delay of 25 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: Assessment Year 2011-12: “1. That the Hon'ble PCIT, Patna erred in appreciating the facts properly. 2. That the Hon'ble PCIT erred in treating the assessment order passed by the learned assessing officer

AARIF ALI,SIWAN vs. AC/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.278 To 283/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2018-19 Aarif Ali……………………………….………. …………………....Appellant Son Of Khush Mohammad, Resident Of Village: Sallahpur, P.O Dindayalpur, Ps: G.B Nagar Darwara, Dist: Siwan, Bihar, Pin-841506. [Pan: Bxfpa9056H] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Muzaffarpur....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None (Adjournment Petition Filed) Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cir(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: All These Six Appeals In Ita Nos. 278 To 283/Patna/2025 Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2013–14 To 2018– 19, Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing All The Captioned Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions And

delay in filing the appeals is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up ITA No. 278/Patna/2025) as a lead case (A.Y. 2013-14) 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was found in possession of cash amounting to ₹10,49,200, which was seized by the Government Railway

AARIF ALI,SIWAN vs. AC/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.278 To 283/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2018-19 Aarif Ali……………………………….………. …………………....Appellant Son Of Khush Mohammad, Resident Of Village: Sallahpur, P.O Dindayalpur, Ps: G.B Nagar Darwara, Dist: Siwan, Bihar, Pin-841506. [Pan: Bxfpa9056H] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Muzaffarpur....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None (Adjournment Petition Filed) Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cir(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: All These Six Appeals In Ita Nos. 278 To 283/Patna/2025 Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2013–14 To 2018– 19, Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing All The Captioned Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions And

delay in filing the appeals is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up ITA No. 278/Patna/2025) as a lead case (A.Y. 2013-14) 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was found in possession of cash amounting to ₹10,49,200, which was seized by the Government Railway

AARIF ALI,SIWAN vs. AC/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.278 To 283/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2018-19 Aarif Ali……………………………….………. …………………....Appellant Son Of Khush Mohammad, Resident Of Village: Sallahpur, P.O Dindayalpur, Ps: G.B Nagar Darwara, Dist: Siwan, Bihar, Pin-841506. [Pan: Bxfpa9056H] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Muzaffarpur....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None (Adjournment Petition Filed) Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cir(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: All These Six Appeals In Ita Nos. 278 To 283/Patna/2025 Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2013–14 To 2018– 19, Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing All The Captioned Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions And

delay in filing the appeals is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up ITA No. 278/Patna/2025) as a lead case (A.Y. 2013-14) 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was found in possession of cash amounting to ₹10,49,200, which was seized by the Government Railway

AARIF ALI,SIWAN vs. AC/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.278 To 283/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2018-19 Aarif Ali……………………………….………. …………………....Appellant Son Of Khush Mohammad, Resident Of Village: Sallahpur, P.O Dindayalpur, Ps: G.B Nagar Darwara, Dist: Siwan, Bihar, Pin-841506. [Pan: Bxfpa9056H] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Muzaffarpur....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None (Adjournment Petition Filed) Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cir(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: All These Six Appeals In Ita Nos. 278 To 283/Patna/2025 Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2013–14 To 2018– 19, Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing All The Captioned Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions And

delay in filing the appeals is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up ITA No. 278/Patna/2025) as a lead case (A.Y. 2013-14) 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was found in possession of cash amounting to ₹10,49,200, which was seized by the Government Railway

AARIF ALI,SIWAN vs. AC/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.278 To 283/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2018-19 Aarif Ali……………………………….………. …………………....Appellant Son Of Khush Mohammad, Resident Of Village: Sallahpur, P.O Dindayalpur, Ps: G.B Nagar Darwara, Dist: Siwan, Bihar, Pin-841506. [Pan: Bxfpa9056H] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Muzaffarpur....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None (Adjournment Petition Filed) Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cir(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: All These Six Appeals In Ita Nos. 278 To 283/Patna/2025 Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2013–14 To 2018– 19, Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing All The Captioned Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions And

delay in filing the appeals is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up ITA No. 278/Patna/2025) as a lead case (A.Y. 2013-14) 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was found in possession of cash amounting to ₹10,49,200, which was seized by the Government Railway

AARIF ALI,SIWAN vs. AC/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.278 To 283/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2018-19 Aarif Ali……………………………….………. …………………....Appellant Son Of Khush Mohammad, Resident Of Village: Sallahpur, P.O Dindayalpur, Ps: G.B Nagar Darwara, Dist: Siwan, Bihar, Pin-841506. [Pan: Bxfpa9056H] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Muzaffarpur....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None (Adjournment Petition Filed) Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cir(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: All These Six Appeals In Ita Nos. 278 To 283/Patna/2025 Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2013–14 To 2018– 19, Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing All The Captioned Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions And

delay in filing the appeals is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. First we take up ITA No. 278/Patna/2025) as a lead case (A.Y. 2013-14) 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was found in possession of cash amounting to ₹10,49,200, which was seized by the Government Railway