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.

depreciation to be allowed under sections 30 and 32. The Assessing Officer determined the taxable income making additions and disallowances. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 and reopened the assessment P a g e 10 | 71 Assessment Year : 2010 -2011 under section 147 on the basis of under assessment. The assessee objected to the reopening

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

33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43-C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent. of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such business

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

33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43-C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent. of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such business

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

33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43-C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent. of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such business

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

33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43-C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent. of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such business

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

33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43-C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent. of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such business

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

33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43-C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent. of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such business

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

33 of the Indian Income-tax Rules, 1922, for the purpose of computing the income of a nonresident even if the ITO had not done so in the assessment proceedings. In CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 , a three- judge Bench of this Court discussed the scope of section 31(3)(a ) of the 1922 Act, which

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

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

section 145(3) is not applicable. The income estimated in the manner provided u/s 144 of the I. T Act, 1961 @ 8% is arbitrary and unjust. The addition as made is fit to be deleted. (iii) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowances of bonafide and legitimate deduction available to the assessee

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

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

section 145(3) is not applicable. The income estimated in the manner provided u/s 144 of the I. T Act, 1961 @ 8% is arbitrary and unjust. The addition as made is fit to be deleted. (iii) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowances of bonafide and legitimate deduction available to the assessee