MITHILESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C or 69D, if such income is not covered under the first condition. In the facts of the present appeal, admittedly, assessee has not offered the income under Section 69A of the Act. Even, the Assessing Officer has not made any separate addition

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. M/S GAURAV RICE & FOOD PROCESSING PVT LTD, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

addition of\nRs. 87,65,840/- on account of unexplained cash credit under section 68 & secondly\naddition of Rs. 1,25,00,000/- in respect of unexplained cash credit under section 68 of\nthe Income

ASHOKA TUBEWELL BORING ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

68 of the Act. The Id. AR submitted that the assessee has suo\nmotto offered this income in the return filed u/s 153A of the Act and\nonce, the return of income has been accepted, no penalty can be\nimposed on the income which is offered by the assessee suo motto.\nThe Id. AR therefore, prayed that the order passed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

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

section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, ld. Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs.2,00,04,931/- in A.Y. 2016-17. In A.Y. 2017-18, the ld. CIT(Appeals

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA vs. BROADSON COMMODITIES PVT LTD, DHANBAD

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed, whereas the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

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

section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, ld. Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs.2,00,04,931/- in A.Y. 2016-17. In A.Y. 2017-18, the ld. CIT(Appeals

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

income under section 68 - Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed said addition -On further, appeal Tribunal deleted said addition by acknowledging that assessee

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

income under section 68 - Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed said addition -On further, appeal Tribunal deleted said addition by acknowledging that assessee

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

income under section 68 - Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed said addition -On further, appeal Tribunal deleted said addition by acknowledging that assessee

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

income under section 68 - Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed said addition -On further, appeal Tribunal deleted said addition by acknowledging that assessee

AMAR KASERA (HUF),PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

income under section 68 - Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed said addition -On further, appeal Tribunal deleted said addition by acknowledging that assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. SONAMOTI AGROTECH PVT LTD, PATNA

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

Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna dated 02.01.2019 passed for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Revenue has taken four grounds of appeal, but its grievance revolves around a single issue, namely ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,87,00,000/- made by the ld. Assessing Officer with the aid of section 68

CHUNNI LAL RAMESHWAR LAL,STATION ROAD SUPAUL vs. ITO WARD 3(5)SAHARSA, SAHARSA

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

addition of Rs.2,67,29,000/- in total income of the appellant, the entire amount of Cash deposited into to the Bank accounts of the appellant during the demonetization Period, alleging unexplained cash credit u/s 68 read with section

SANTOSH KUMAR KESHRI,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 226/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Santosh Kumar Keshri,………..…….…………Appellant Shop No. 3, Jaiswal Market, Sabji Mandi, Mithapur-800001, Bihar [Pan:Asapk1127E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,...Respondent Dc/Ac Circle-6, Patna-800001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Supriya Sharma, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

addition of Rs.58,62,495/- considering the figure of Sundry Creditors on the contention that figure has increased from Rs.65,987 (FY 2015- 16) to Rs.58,62,495/- at the end of FY 2016-17 and treated the whole amount as bogus sundry creditors to the total income of the 2 Santosh Kumar Keshri assessee under section 68

ACIT vs. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WELFARE HUMAN RESOURCES,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed while the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

additions made in the impugned Assessment order dated 29.12.2010 for A.Y 2005-06 u/s 143(3)/147 which were included in the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the appeal filed in respect of this assessment order. II. C.O. No. 1/PAT/2012, AY: 2005-06 International School of Social Welfare & Human Resource Society Α.Υ. 2005-06 Grounds

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA, PATNA vs. SMT. SIPRA GUPTA, PATNA

income is added twice. First,\nby way of same being shown as sales during the year and second time\nagain by way of adding the cash which was deposited in the bank.\nBesides, addition was made by the learned AO u/s 68 of the Act which\nis not correct section

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

income as sustained by the learned CIT(A) is arbitrary, unjustified void ab-initio and bad in law. The addition / disallowances as made is lit to be deleted. (4) Thal the case laws relied upon by the learned CIT(A) in his order dated 19.06.24 is not at all applicable in as much as the same relates to section 68

LOVELY RANI CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, PATNA

ADDITIONAL CIT:\nGOVERNMENT OF INDIA\nOFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,\nCIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR\nNO. ACIT/C-1(2)//APPROVAL/2010-11/5293 DATED, BHUBANESWAR, THE\n27/29TH DECEMBER, 2010\nTO\nTHE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,\nRANGE-1, BHUBANESWAR.\nSUB: APPROVAL OF DRAFT ORDERS U/S 153D OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 IN THE\nCASE OF M/S. SERAJUDDIN& CO. 19A, BRITISH INDIA STREET

SUDHIR KUMAR,PATNA vs. I.T.O., PATNA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sudhir Kumar, Income-Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Vs. Patna. Patna. (Pan: Amlpk4871E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri K. M. Mishra, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.05.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Dhanbad, Camp Office At Patna Appeal No. 71/Cit(A)-Ii/13-14 Dated 25.02.2014 For A.Y. 2010-11 Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By Ito, Ward-6(1), Patna, Dated 26.03.2013. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Filed Return Of Income On 18.10.2010 Reporting Total Income Of Rs.3,01,260/-. In The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ld. Ao Sought Details On Various Aspects Of The Income Reported By The Assessee & Completed The Assessment By Making The Additions As Under: “Total Income As Per Return Rs. 3,01,260/- Add: As Discussed In Para D Rs. 3,42,708/- Add: As Discussed In Para E Rs. 14,03,744/- Add: As Discussed In Para F Rs. 58,92,354/- Total Income Rs. 89,40,066/-“

68,871/- and made a computation of income under the head “Profits & Gains of Business or Profession” by applying the percentage of 15.75 which was reported by the assessee to arrive at income of Rs. 2,61,569/- on the gross receipts of Rs.16,60,755/- + Rs.53,000/-. Ld. AO concluded that the total income of the assessee comes

ROHIT KHANDELWAL,MADHUBANI vs. AC/DCIT, CENT, CIR, MUZAFFARPUR, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2021-22

income referred to in section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D for any previous year, the assessee shall pay by way of penalty, in addition