MOTOR MACHINERUY TOOLS,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz)]

business income as per the provision of Section 28(iv) of the Act. In reply, it was submitted by the assessee that the amount in question was given as subsidy for the purchase of van and the same was actually utilised for purchase of van in the immediately succeeding year. It was submitted that the van was purchased

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

THE MUZAFFARPUR CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Mainsh Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

business and as such should have been allowed to be set off against current year’s income. 13. For that in any view, depreciation

VIKRAMSHILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LTD,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

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

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

depreciation was not considered and allowed to be set of. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) in a detailed order allowed the claim of carry forward and set of business

NORTH BIHAR POWER DISTRUBUTION CO. LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

business of distribution of electricity. It filed its return of income showing total loss of Rs.856,46,52,052/-. Case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS for which statutory notices were issued and served on the assessee and were duly complied with. Assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act determining total loss at Rs.807

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

depreciation of Rs.9,42,162/-, which will be allowed along with interest and remuneration to partners allowable. The disallowances made by the A.O. u/s 40A(3) and section 40(a)(ia) are hereby deleted and income is estimated at the end of discussion of all other grounds of appeal”. 6. The ld. Sr. D.R. took us through the assessment order

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

depreciation and other charges. The total hire charges is not taxable. The addition of Rs. 9,43,735/- on account of hire charges as sustained 1 confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is arbitrary, unjustified, void ab-initio and bad in law. The addition as sustained is fit to be deleted. 3. For that in the facts and circumstances

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

depreciation and other charges. The total hire charges is not taxable. The addition of Rs. 9,43,735/- on account of hire charges as sustained 1 confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is arbitrary, unjustified, void ab-initio and bad in law. The addition as sustained is fit to be deleted. 3. For that in the facts and circumstances

MASUDAN TANTI,BHAGALPUR vs. CIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

income of the assessee. 7. As regards the applicability of section 44AD, the same applies to the eligible assessee which is defined as under and the relevant provisions are reproduced as under: “44AD. Special provision for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis.—(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43C,in the case

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

depreciation chart with copy of invoices/bills of items added in assets during the year. 25 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises 23. Copy of Sales Tax/VAT/CGST return for the AY-2018-19 supporting evidence of payment of other taxes. 24. Submit computation of income. 24. Please furnish ledgers of expenses made during the year under the heads - rent

NEHA VERMA,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN

In the result, all the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

NEHA VERMA,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN

In the result, all the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

NEHA VERMA,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

NEHA VERMA,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

NEHA VERMA,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

NEHA VERMA ,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vp & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Am

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (4) The provisions of Chapter XVII-C shall not apply to an eligible assessee in so far as they relate to the eligible business. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, an eligible assessee who claims that his profits and gains from the eligible business are lower than

ARYAN FLAVOURS,NOIDA vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Ita No. 369 /Pat/2025 ( Asstt. Year: 2018-19) Aryan Flavours Vs Dc/Ac Circle-1, Patna B-8, Sector-6, Noida, Gautam Muzaffarpur, Muzaffarpur, Bihar Buddha Nagar, Noida, Noida, Up- 201301 Patna. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabfa3538J Assessee By : Sh. Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit. Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2026 Order Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

income of the after allowing depreciation @ 10% on the said expenditure. 3. In the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on this issue by noting that the said expenditure was not allowable under the provisions of section 37(1) which expressly excluded the expenditure which is not in the nature as described in section