M/S BIHAR STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN. LTD.,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

disallowing the claim of provision for Storage Loss amounting to Rs. 5.00 Crore under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 3. The Appellant prays that the addition of Rs. 5.00 Crore (Rs. Five Crore Only) made in respect of Provision for Storage Loss be deleted." 4. That the whole order passed

VIKRAMSHILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHKARI SANGH LTD,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

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

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

loss. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), however rejected the claim of carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation. The only ground for such disallowance

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]

disallowable u/s 36(1)(viia) in earlier years. 15. For that the amount credited to profit & loss account as provisions written back consist of the aid provided by the Central and State Government in lieu of the irrecoverable debt. This amount, though credited in profit & loss account, is actually a capital receipt, not liable to tax under the Income

SAMASTIPUR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, DARBHANGA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

disallowance of carry forward loss of ₹26,78,066/-. It\nwas argued at the time of hearing that this has been allowed as set

SAMASTIPUR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, DARBHANGA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

disallowance of carry forward loss of ₹26,78,066/-. It was argued at the time of hearing that this has been allowed as set

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

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)

set-aside the finding of the Id. CIT(A) and delete the addition. 20. All other grounds raised in this appeal are general in nature and need no adjudication. 21. Now we take up assessee's appeal in ITA No. 22/Pat/ 2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 22. The sole issue for our consideration is disallowance of indirect expenditure

SAMASTIPUR KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, DARBHANGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.32/Pat/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Samastipur Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Merged With Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank)……………....Appellant C/O Nirmal & Associates, Ca, Nepali Kothi, Opp Gasoline Petrol Pump, Boring Road, Patna-800001. [Pan: Aafas8891R] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3, Darbhanga..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishant Maitin, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 21, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.10.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Regional Rural Bank & Had Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Nil Income After Claiming Deduction On Account Of Brought Forward Losses & Deductions U/S 80P Of The Act. The Deduction U/S 80P Was Withdrawn From The Statute W.E.F Asst Year 2007-08. Accordingly, In The Present Case Of The Assessee, Assessment Was Framed By Disallowing The Claim Of Brought Forward Losses & Deduction U/S 80P Of The Act.

disallowing the claim of brought forward losses and deduction u/s 80P of the Act. I.T.A. No.32/Pat/2019 Samastipur Kshetriya Gramin Bank 3. Against the order passed the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not file any appeal against the quantum order passed by the Assessing Officer. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty u/s 271(1) of the Act and against the order

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

set aside. 7. For that the disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80C may be allowed on the basis of documentary evidence available with the appellant”. 3. The Registry has informed that the appeal is time barred by 212 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee filed a petition before the ITAT dated 30th June

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

disallowing Rs.51,32,41,851/- on the account of deduction claimed u/s 80-IA of the Act due to interest income from Fixed Deposit, Saving Account and other income. 9. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. We will take up the appeal