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

BIJAY KUMAR SARAF,DALDALI BAZAR, MUZAFFARPUR vs. DC/AC CIRCLE 1,MUZFFARPUR, IT-OFFICE, POLICE LINE, SIKANDERPUR MUZZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed for the said year and completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144 and assessed the total income ₹1,26,54,552/-. Being aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who considered the grounds of appeal, the assessment order and has given its finding as under: 9.9 In view of the above

MOHAMMAD SAIDULLAH,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (3), MOTIHARI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowance of ₹1,38,302/- out of the expenses claimed and assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹20,54,617/- u/s 143(3) of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who granted opportunities of being heard to the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has as reproduced

M/S BIHAR STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. CIT (A), NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 was disposed of by an Order ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1047736388(1) dated 30-11-2022 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax M/s Bihar State Warehousing Corpn. Ltd.

54,98,470/-, as against assessed income of Rs. 2,90,98,470/- , under section 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ("the Act"). 2. For that the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming in disallowing

M/S BIHAR STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. CIT (A), NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 was disposed of by an Order ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1047736388(1) dated 30-11-2022 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax M/s Bihar State Warehousing Corpn. Ltd.

54,98,470/-, as against assessed income of Rs. 2,90,98,470/- , under section 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ("the Act"). 2. For that the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming in disallowing

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

disallowance u/s 43B of the Act of ₹1,44,04,341/- on account of interest payable to Public Financial Institution. Aggrieved with the intimation order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) who considered the submissions of the assessee. As regards the addition on account of ESI, he directed the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred

M/S KUMAR PIYUSH CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD,NALANDA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

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

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

54,942/- as “retention money”. This action of the assessee allegedly resulted in a loss of Rs. 98,65,419/-. On this issue, the Ld. PCIT noticed that the so called “retention money” was not debited in the P&L Account but was straightway adjusted in the computation of income. This action of the assessee was treated as a case

ITO, WARD-2(1), BEGUSARAI vs. SMT. SATAYABATI DEVI, KHAGARIA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the Cross Objection by the assessee both are dismissed

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

section 143(3) was issued and served upon the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. Assessing Officer has made enquiries from the assessee but the assessee submitted that all her papers have been misplaced and she does not have anything. She had handed over these papers to her Advocate Shri Subodh Kumar, who died and she could

ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA vs. M/S SUN COMTECH PVT LTD, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

54 PM SELL 1 1149.80 250 287450.00 0 5.2. The assessee was confronted with the above findings which emerged from the information received from the NMCE, Ahmedabad. Copy of ledger account of few such counter parties were provided to the assessee as per the following details: s. Product Date Broker Counter Party Counter Party Broker No. 21/03/2011 Marina Commotrade

PIYUSH & ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee had furnished

PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee had furnished

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. PIYUSH & ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee had furnished

PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee had furnished

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee had furnished

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. PROMINENT FINANCIAL ADVISORY PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.99/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle -1 Piyush & Associates Private Ltd. Patna, 6Th Floor, C.R. (Annexee) Vs Pirmohani, Kadamkuan, Patna, Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Bihar-800003 Patna-800001 [Pan : Aadcp3041N] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

section. This group was subjected to search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ITA Nos.78,79,80,99,102,103/Pat/2021 conducted on 15th March, 2018. On account of search, assessment proceeding for preceding six assessment years were initiated by way of issuing valid notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act after the assessee had furnished

KUMAR SUMAN SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

disallowance of Rs. 64,000/-\non account of low withdrawal for A.Y. 2001-02. The ground is partly\nallowed.\"\n11.1 We, after examining the facts of the case and submission made by\nthe ld. DR, find that the ld. CIT(A) while passing the impugned order\ndiscussed the facts of the issue at length and allowed partial relief

KUMAR SUMAN SINGH,PATNA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

disallowance of Rs. 64,000/-\non account of low withdrawal for A.Y. 2001-02. The ground is partly\nallowed.\"\n11.1 We, after examining the facts of the case and submission made by\nthe ld. DR, find that the 1d. CIT(A) while passing the impugned order\ndiscussed the facts of the issue at length and allowed partial relief