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

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

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

section 154 on 27.04.2015, the Assessing Officer re-computed the income of the assessee by applying a net profit rate of 6.5% at Rs.53,42,752/-. After allowing depreciation of Rs.7,02,732/- from the profit so worked out, the total income of the assessee was determined by him at Rs.46,40

ACIT, PATNA vs. NEW ERA SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT WELFARE SOCIETY, PATNA

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation is not in respect of an asset, acquisition of which has been claimed as application of income, in the same or any other previous year; and (d) such expenditure is not in the form of any contribution or donation to any person. Explanation.—For the purposes of determining the amount of expenditure under this sub-section, the provisions

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

MAHUA COOPERATIVE COLD STORAGE LTD, MAHUA,VAISHALI vs. ADIT,CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

40 to of section 43B of I.T. Act refers to section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956. ITA No.: 520/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mahua Cooperative Cold Storage Ltd. 4) For that the learned Addl. CIT(A) further referred to CRISIL and Care Edge Ratings, which are not relevant to decide the liability

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed North Bihar Distributor, AY: 2013-14. to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

section 40. (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed North Bihar Distributor, AY: 2013-14. to have been calculated as if the eligible assessee had claimed and had been actually allowed the deduction in respect of the depreciation

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

40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. 12. With the assistance of ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that on the issue, ld. Assessing Officer has recorded the following finding:- 11 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Ashok Kumar 12 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Ashok Kumar 13. We are of the view that ld. Assessing Officer

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. BIHAR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, MUNGER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

depreciation claimed by the assessee for reducing the bills were not supplied and total disallowance of Rs. 2,76,084/- was made and the same was added back to the income of the assessee before set off of losses. Thereafter, the ld. AO further observed that the assessee had claimed an amount of Rs. 3.65 crores towards provision

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. SH. SURESH , PATNA

section 28(iv) of the I. T. Act, 1961. The learned CIT(A) passed the order after full appreciation of the facts of the case and after application of judicial mind. The learned CIT(A) called for Remand Report from the Assessing Officer but the Assessing Officer did not respond to the Remand Report inspite of reminders having been given

M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCTION,CHAPRA vs. DCIT, CICLE-2, MUZAFFAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.200/Pat/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Kumar Construction Dcit, Circle-2, Muzaffarpur P.O. Dumri Adda, P.S. Vs. Doriganj, Dist. Chapra. Pan: Aajfm 7295 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Smt. Archana Sharma, Ca Respondent By : Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Preferred By The Assessee For The A.Y. 2005-06 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Passed By Osd, Cit(A) Dated 26.06.2014. The Assessee Has Taken The Following Revised Ground Of Appeal For A.Y. 2005-06 As Under: “I. The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Assessed Profit @ 8% Of Total Gross Receipts Amount To Rs. 2,40,85,620/- Amounting To Rs. 19,26,850/- & Added Back To Assessee’S Income While Computation Of Tax. Ii. Capital Introduced By 6 Partner’S Amounting To Rs. 12,20,000/- Has Been Outrightly Rejected By Ao & Added Back To Assessees Income While Computation Of Tax. Iii. The Respondent Have Rejected The Books Of Accounts Invoking The Provision Of Section 145(3) & Rejecting The Books Of Accounts Regularly Maintained & Holding That The Audited Books Of Accounts Were Not Absolutely Reliable. So, We Pray For Consider The Revised Grounds Stated Above & Grant Relief For Assessee’S Income @ 6% Of The Total Receipts Of Rs. 2,40,85,620/-.”

section 145(3) and rejecting the books of accounts regularly maintained and holding that the audited books of accounts were not absolutely reliable. So, we pray for consider the revised grounds stated above and grant relief for assessee’s income @ 6% of the total receipts of Rs. 2,40,85,620/-.” 2 M/s. Kumar Construction A.Y. 2005-06 2. Brief

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 u/s 40

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 u/s 40