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

2) Any deduction allowable under the provisions of sections 30 to 38 shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to have been already given full effect to and no further deduction under those sections shall be allowed : Provided that where the eligible assessee is a firm, the salary and interest paid to its partners shall be deducted

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

2) Any deduction allowable under the provisions of sections 30 to 38 shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to have been already given full effect to and no further deduction under those sections shall be allowed : Provided that where the eligible assessee is a firm, the salary and interest paid to its partners shall be deducted

ACIT vs. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WELFARE HUMAN RESOURCES,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed while the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5. A perusal of above two reasons recorded shows that the AO has initiated second proceedings u/s 147 during the pendency of first re - assessment proceedings primarily for the same reasons. There is hardly any material difference between the two sets of reason to believe as above. The AO could only have initiated another proceedings under section 147 to assess

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

5 of Section 44AD of the Act and since sec 44AD of the Act has direct bearing on the issue raised before us the same is reproduced below: - “44AD. [ Special provision for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis. [ Substituted by Act 33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections

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

5 of Section 44AD of the Act and since sec 44AD of the Act has direct bearing on the issue raised before us the same is reproduced below: - “44AD. [ Special provision for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis. [ Substituted by Act 33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections

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

5 of Section 44AD of the Act and since sec 44AD of the Act has direct bearing on the issue raised before us the same is reproduced below: - “44AD. [ Special provision for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis. [ Substituted by Act 33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections

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

5 of Section 44AD of the Act and since sec 44AD of the Act has direct bearing on the issue raised before us the same is reproduced below: - “44AD. [ Special provision for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis. [ Substituted by Act 33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections

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

5 of Section 44AD of the Act and since sec 44AD of the Act has direct bearing on the issue raised before us the same is reproduced below: - “44AD. [ Special provision for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis. [ Substituted by Act 33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections

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

5 of Section 44AD of the Act and since sec 44AD of the Act has direct bearing on the issue raised before us the same is reproduced below: - “44AD. [ Special provision for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis. [ Substituted by Act 33 of 2009, Section 20 (w.e.f. 1.4.2011).] (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections

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

2) Any deduction allowable under the provisions of sections 30 to 38 shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to have been already given full effect to and no further deduction under those sections shall be allowed: * * * * * (3) The written down value of any asset of an eligible business shall be deemed to have been calculated

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

2. Sri Janak Kumar Singh 43,30,000/- 3. Sri Baramdev Yadav 28,60,400/- 4. Sri Ashok Yadav 32,56,424/- 5. Sri Manish Kumar 1,00,000/- ___________________ Total: 1,43,10,424/- ___________________ 13. It is pertinent to mention here that the assessee has not shown this expense separately, in its audit report. Had the books

PUNRASAR JUTE PARK LIMITED,PURNEA vs. CIT, PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year): Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

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

2) An appeal was filed in Form No.35 alongwith grounds of appeal, statement of facts, proof of payment of appeal fee etc. During the appeal proceedings, a letter of authority was filed on the name of Sri Sanjay Kumar, CA who appeared in response to the notices issued. The assessee had taken as many as 8 grounds of which ground

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

5. deductions/exemptions/rebate claimed, current year/carried forwarded loss set-off/adjusted, advance tax paid, self-assessment tax paid, TDS deducted, total tax paid, refund claimed for the current year under consideration and previous two years. Provide the comparison of sales/turnover, gross profit, net profit, GP 6. ratio, NP ratio for the year under consideration and previous two years. Provide the justification

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)

section 32(2) of the Act would ensure that any unabsorbed depreciation would be available for setting of in future financial years. There are a catena of judgments which direct that the AO is duty bound to consider claims of depreciation even when such claims have not been clearly presented in the return of income. In light of this position

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

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

5,80,39,300/- or u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) or any other section in ITR s the assessee had not filed the Form 10B under section 12A(1)(b). In view of the clear admission on the part of the assessee that it has not filed Form 10B, the assessee is not entitled to exemption u/s.11/12

ROHIT KUMAR JHUNJHUNWALA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-5(1), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 73/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Rohit Kumar Jhunjhunwala,……………….…Appellant Keshev Rai Lane Chowk, Patna City-800008, Bihar [Pan:Aaqpj7024F] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-5(1), Patna Appearances By: Shri Alok Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

depreciation, ld. Assessing Officer left no other option, but to complete the time barring scrutiny assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act by disallowing the claim of Rs.19,13,907/- claimed by the assessee and assessed income of the assessee at Rs.23,79,307/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals

RAVI LOCHAN SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PATNA

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

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

depreciation will be allowed as per the provision of section 32(1) of IT Act. Hence, the appellant's contention that the addition was arbitrary found incorrect and after considering the facts and merits of the case, I dismissed this ground. Ground No- 3 regarding disallowance of Rs. 2,32,000/- on account of 50% of the rental income

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

2) is to be given in the cases where an assessee has filed the return. It is the first opportunity given to the assessee that what he wants to submit in support of his return. In a case when no return is being filed, the ld. Assessing Officer can initiate the investigating machinery by issuance of a questionnaire under section