VIJAYA SINGH,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(1), PATNA, PATNA, BIHAR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 519/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Vijaya Singh,…………………………...….………Appellant M-55/22A, S.K. Nagar, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Asups6086N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………......Respondent Ward-6(1), Patna, Lok Nayak Jay Prakash Bhawan, Dak Bunglow Road, Patna-800001, Bihar

69A as unexplained money and taxed as per section 115BBE, therefore, the ground on this issue was dismissed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). The issue relating to the levy of charging interest is concerned, the ld. CIT(Appeals) was of the opinion that levy of interest is mandatory as per the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

MITHILESH PRASAD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (3), SAMASTIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.427/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mithilesh Prasad…………….………………. …………………....Appellant S/O Ram Bhakta Baitha, Damodarpur, Muzaffarpur, Bihar-842001. [Pan: Ankpp5641D] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(3), Samastipur…....……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 08, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 12, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 01.08.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Dealer Of M/S Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Ioc) & Derives Income From The Sale Of Lpg Cylinders. For The Assessment Year 2017–18, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring A Total Income Of ₹6,04,460. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Made Various

disallowance of expenses claimed in the Profit & Loss Account amounting to ₹617878/- 3. Cash deposits of ₹63,29,000 during the demonetisation period, out of which 10%, i.e., ₹6,32,900, was added under section 69A

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

69A read with section 115BBE of the Act and assessed the same under the Act. 10. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer, without giving any opportunity, much less sufficient opportunity, has erred in holding that the opening balance of Proprietor's Capital (being the closing balance as on 31/03/2015

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

BIR BABU PANDEY,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO WARD 2(4), SIWAN

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

sections": [ "69A", "40(a)(ia)", "143(3)", "250", "142(1)" ], "issues": "Whether the disallowance of 50% of cash deposits during

RANI DEVI,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

69A of the Income Tax Act and further income was determined by applying net profit @ 8% on the total turnover/receipt as shown in the profit & loss account of Rs.4,48,74,289/- as per provision of section 44AD of the Income Tax Act. Thus, the total income from business activity of the assessee was determined at Rs.35

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

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)

section 44ADA of the Act I.T.A. Nos. 17 to 23/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Sunita Kumari I.T.A. No. 25/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 I.T.A. No. 26/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 I.T.A. No. 27/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Uday Shankar Arun I.T.A. No. 28/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jeevan Rekha Diagnostic & Nursing Home 18 have rightly been applied

BRIJESH KUMAR,WEST CHAMPARAN vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

69A of the Act and further disallowance was made @10% of various expenses claimed and the deduction claimed under Chapter VI-A was also denied. Aggrieved I.T.A. No.: 77/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Brijesh Kumar. with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who did not consider the request of the assessee to admit

SANOJ KUMAR SINGH ,HAJIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3) , VAISHALI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

disallowance merely on an estimation basis, the As- sessing Officer noted that total turnover/sales of the assessee during the year were Rs. 5,07,59,673/- out of which the assessee has deposited cash to the tune of Rs. 1,87,00,900/- during the year meaning thereby that the average deposit per month worked