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

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

5,15,169/- have been paid to various employees in cash. On going over the order passed by the AO one thing is not in dispute that payees are not the new to the assessee and they are the employees of the assessee to whom salary payments are being made. So, identity of the payees and payment of bonus

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

D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna dated 28.01.2015 passed for A.Y. 2009-10. 1 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 M/s. Kumar Construction 2. Grounds No. 1, 2 & 3 are inter-connected grounds therefore we first take these grounds

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5) cannot be pressed into service for reading a limitation of the deduction under sub-section (1) only to business income" b) AVM Cine Products v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2021] 123 taxmann.com 41 (Madras)/[2020] 421 ITR 431 (Madras), wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that "interest income earned by assessee

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5) cannot be pressed into service for reading a limitation of the deduction under sub-section (1) only to business income" b) AVM Cine Products v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2021] 123 taxmann.com 41 (Madras)/[2020] 421 ITR 431 (Madras), wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that "interest income earned by assessee

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPN.LTD.,PATNA vs. CIT (APPEAL), DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5) cannot be pressed into service for reading a limitation of the deduction under sub-section (1) only to business income" b) AVM Cine Products v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2021] 123 taxmann.com 41 (Madras)/[2020] 421 ITR 431 (Madras), wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that "interest income earned by assessee

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, COR-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5) cannot be pressed into service for reading a limitation of the deduction under sub-section (1) only to business income" b) AVM Cine Products v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2021] 123 taxmann.com 41 (Madras)/[2020] 421 ITR 431 (Madras), wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that "interest income earned by assessee

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 2(1) PATNA, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5) cannot be pressed into service for reading a limitation of the deduction under sub-section (1) only to business income" b) AVM Cine Products v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2021] 123 taxmann.com 41 (Madras)/[2020] 421 ITR 431 (Madras), wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that "interest income earned by assessee

BIHAR STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, P)ATNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

5) cannot be pressed into service for reading a limitation of the deduction under sub-section (1) only to business income" b) AVM Cine Products v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2021] 123 taxmann.com 41 (Madras)/[2020] 421 ITR 431 (Madras), wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that "interest income earned by assessee

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

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)

D E R PER, BENCH: All these appeals are filed by assessees directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna- 3, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT(A)’) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter ‘the Act’), event dated 26/11/2022, for all the impugned Assessment Years. 2. As the issues involved in all these appeals

PAVAN KUMAR BHAGAT,SAHARSA vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowing and adding Rs.11,65,739 claimed as commission expenses by the appellant, solely on the ground that the said deduction is not allowable in view of violation of provision of section 194G of the Act and section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, without considering the fact that the commission have been paid genuinely and through banking mode