PRASHANT PACKAGING PVT.LTD,PATNA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIR-2, PATNA, PATNA

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

10. The genuintry of transactions, rate of gross profit or the fact that the bonafide of the assessee that payments are made to producers of hides and skin are also neither doubted nor disputed by the AO. On the basis of these facts it is noi justified on the part of the AO to disallow 20% of the payments made

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

disallowance under these sections, the profit of the assessee deserves to be estimated. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm derives income as a civil contractor. It has filed its return of income on 12.10.2009 showing total income of Rs.36,09,014/- on a total turnover of Rs.9,71,11,489/-. The case

MATA LALTI DEVI FOUNDATION,ARA vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (4), ARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowing applications of funds. The appeal was filed after a delay of 244 days.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding the reasons to be bonafide. It held that an educational institution with gross receipts not exceeding ₹1 crore is not required to be registered under Section 10(23C)(iiid) of the Act to claim exemption. The plea that only

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S UTTAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] I.T.A. No. 29/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-1, Muzaffarpur M/S Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank

23,19,536/- Rs. 61,11,84,63,907/- Average Rural Advance (61,11,84,63,907/12) Rs. 5,09,32,05,326/- 10% of Rs. 12,73,30,13,316 (Allowable) Rs. 50,93,20,532/- Claimed u/s 36(1)(viia) Rs. 10,70,70,590/- 7. We have gone through the order passed

ARANYA CLEARERS,GAYA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), GAYA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

23, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : April 5, 2022 O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-1 dated 31.08.2018 passed for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal. However

JCIT(IN-SITU), CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. TECHNOCULTURE BUILDING CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes\nand Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

23,78,655/-\nto closing stock stating that there are no defects found by the Assessing Officer in\nbooks of accounts submitted by the appellant. While as per records, the assessee\ndid not submitted specific details as called for during assessment proceedings and\nhence AO did not get the opportunity to point out the defects in books of accounts

UDAY SHANKAR ARUN,GAYA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

SUNITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

UDAY SHANKAR ARUN,GAYA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

UDAY SHANKAR ARUN,GAYA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA No. 17/Pat/2023;

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 17 To 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2019-20 Sunita Kumari Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Mir Abu Saleh Road Vs Kotwali Bihar - 823001 [Pan: Aoupk1552K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

10 source of deposit in the bank account but Id. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of deposit of opening cash on hand at Rs.65,195/-. Considering the income declared by the assessee and also considering the withdrawals made in the past and the balance sheet and income and expenditure account filed before us, the source of cash

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. YASHI FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 'professional and technical services.' The Ld. AO noted that, there was discrepancy in the reply of the assessee and the amount claimed in the profit and loss account and required further details; which were however, not filed. Therefore, professional and technical services expenses and society maintenance expenses were disallowed and the total income was assessed at ₹10

DINA NATH YADAV,PATNA vs. ITO WARD - 4(2), PATNA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUAMR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

10(37) of the Act. 1.3 Aggrieved with this action, the assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) where also he could not succeed mainly on the ground that TDS u/s 194LA 2 Dina Nath Yadav of the Act done by the District Land Acquisition Officer was attracted only when non-agricultural land was involved. The second ground taken