M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

72 Taxman 174 (J & K) the notice under Section 143 (2) of the 1961 Act was served upon one S, who was neither a member of the family of the Assessee nor his duly authorized agent. However, S had been accepting the notice on behalf of the Assessee and prosecuting the cases on his behalf earlier before the income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. NORTH BIHAR POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and COs of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

disallowance of ₹72,67,00,000/- by the learned CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO on account of delayed payment surcharge by the consumers. 4.1. The learned AO during the assessment proceeding noted from the documents/evidences furnished by assessee that assessee had followed mercantile/ accrual system of accounting and with regard to delayed payment of surcharge (DPS) assessee

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

disallowance of Rs.76,191/- @20% out of expenses claimed under various heads. (8) For that the sustenance of addition/disallowances of Rs.7,26,001/-, Rs. 10,56,328/-, Rs.32,71,379/-, Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.76.191/- by the Ld. CIT(A) are wrong, illegal and unjustified on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. (9) For that

KHURSHID ASHRAF,PATNA vs. ITO WARD-4 (5), PATNA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

72,600/-. The ld. Assessing Officer has estimated the income of the assessee at 8% of the gross receipt as per section 44AD. He estimated the income of the assessee. However, apart from that, ld. Assessing Officer has worked out a sum of Rs.6,95,573/- as excess sale, which according to him, assessee was unable to explain

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

disallowance of Rs. 8,30,23,893/on account of Professional and Technical Services (PTS) rendered by the appellant assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO stated that the assessee is engaged in producing feature films, purchase and sale of satellite rights, payment to actors, directors, composers and other professionals for the production of movies, serials

THE MUZAFFARPUR CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Mainsh Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

72 of the Income Tax Act and should have been to the set off from the current year income. 12. For that the carried forward business losses are the regular business loss incurred during the regular course of banking business and as such should have been allowed to be set off against current year’s income. 13. For that

MAHENDRA PRASAD,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, ITD, DELHI, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section is not applicable, and the accounts are duly audited. 7. For that the addition of Rs.11,11,023/- on account of estimation of profit in wholesale trading business of kerosene oil is wholly unjustified, since the sale price is controlled and it is not correct to say that purchases are not verifiable. 8. For that the estimation

RAKESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos.85 & 86/Pat/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

72,460 / - debited in profit and loss Page 4 of 18 I.T.A. No.85& 86/Pat/2017 A Ys: 2012-13 & 2013-14, Rakesh Kumar account which means the monthly salary expenses was of Rs.14,371/- which rules out employment/ deployment of any highly qualified hardware/software engineers because the amount of Rs.14,371/- is even not enough to hire one watchman

RAKESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos.85 & 86/Pat/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

72,460 / - debited in profit and loss Page 4 of 18 I.T.A. No.85& 86/Pat/2017 A Ys: 2012-13 & 2013-14, Rakesh Kumar account which means the monthly salary expenses was of Rs.14,371/- which rules out employment/ deployment of any highly qualified hardware/software engineers because the amount of Rs.14,371/- is even not enough to hire one watchman