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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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)

disallowance of indirect expenditure at Rs.84,035/-. We notice that the gross professional receipt for the year under consideration is Rs .4,92,509/-and the assessee has claimed indirect expenditure at Rs.3,30,289/- and declared professional income at Rs.1,62,220/- which is less than 50% of the professional receipt which the assessee was required to declare

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

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowance of the provisional expenditure as per para 11 of the assessment order at ₹44,70,128/- were made and the total income was assessed at ₹176,92,74,630/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered in detail the provisions of section

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

PRABHAKAR JHA,MADHUBANI vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

disallowances out of salary to staff, miscellaneous expenses, travelling expenses etc. The ld. Commissioner took cognizance under section 263 of the Income Tax Act and observed that a perusal of the assessment record 2 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Prabhakar Jha would reveal that the assessee received contractual income of Rs.15,84,602/- from Indian Oil Corporation Limited. This contractual receipt

SHASHI KRISHNA EDUCATIONAL AVAM WELFARE SOCIETY,PATNA vs. AO, PATNA

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

92,441/- (within the 15% permissible limit u/s U(l)(a)) for charitable purposes, and therefore the conditions of section 11 were duly complied with. 6. That the demand of Rs. 53,13,260/- is unjustified, arbitrary, and deserves to be quashed. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time

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 expenditure amounting to Rs. 8,30,23,893/- made under professional and technical services without verify the facts that large payment made under section 194J to the person who have not filed return of income in comparison to total payments on TAN corresponding to PAN in form 26A for section code 194J. (ii) Whether on the facts

SUDHANSHU SHEKHAR,GAYA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GAYA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

disallowed in a single stroke mechanically, without applying any mind and has travelled on the same track as was created by the Ld. AO. Thus there was gross violation off the principles of natural justice, hence, the order u/s 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 7. That the notices

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 801A could not be audited as the assessee failed to claim the same while filing return u/s 139. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A)-3, Patna failed to appreciate the fact that the auditor in his audit report did not confirmed eligibility of deduction u/s 80IA

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 PATNA, PATNA vs. GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

section 801A could not be audited as the assessee failed to claim the same while filing return u/s 139. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A)-3, Patna failed to appreciate the fact that the auditor in his audit report did not confirmed eligibility of deduction u/s 80IA