M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

business of medicines is Rs. 46,72,241/-. Book profit is Rs. 1,69,494/- from which deduction for salary and interest paid to partners of Rs. 1,68,199/- has been claimed, reporting Rs. 1,295/- as total income for the year under consideration. 5.2. Ld. AO drew attention to the provisions of section

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

business of medicines is Rs. 46,72,241/-. Book profit is Rs. 1,69,494/- from which deduction for salary and interest paid to partners of Rs. 1,68,199/- has been claimed, reporting Rs. 1,295/- as total income for the year under consideration. 5.2. Ld. AO drew attention to the provisions of section

BALKRISHNA BHALOTIA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMUI vs. PCIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68,330/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a notice under section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee on 23.09.2019. It is pertinent to observe that a survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act was carried out at the business

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/-“

business 16,60,755/- 2,61,569/- Professional income 53,000/- 53,000/- Interest on FD etc. 3,68,871/- 3,68,871/- Total 20,82,626/- 6,83,440/- Less income disclosed 3,40,732/- Undisclosed income 3,42,708/- 3. The assessing officer has erred in computing undisclosed income as above. It has been stated in the assessment

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

Business Standard which is attached in the paper book page 2, the contents of which is as under: 18. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further placed reliance upon the copy of Demat account, whereby, the said shares of GCM had come into the Demat account of the assessee on 05.04.2013. The Ld. Counsel for the Page

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

Business Standard which is attached in the paper book page 2, the contents of which is as under: 18. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further placed reliance upon the copy of Demat account, whereby, the said shares of GCM had come into the Demat account of the assessee on 05.04.2013. The Ld. Counsel for the Page

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

Business Standard which is attached in the paper book page 2, the contents of which is as under: 18. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further placed reliance upon the copy of Demat account, whereby, the said shares of GCM had come into the Demat account of the assessee on 05.04.2013. The Ld. Counsel for the Page

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

Business Standard which is attached in the paper book page 2, the contents of which is as under: 18. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further placed reliance upon the copy of Demat account, whereby, the said shares of GCM had come into the Demat account of the assessee on 05.04.2013. The Ld. Counsel for the Page

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

Business Standard which is attached in the paper book page 2, the contents of which is as under: 18. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further placed reliance upon the copy of Demat account, whereby, the said shares of GCM had come into the Demat account of the assessee on 05.04.2013. The Ld. Counsel for the Page

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

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

business income of ₹5\ncrore, declared the loss in the return at ₹4,99,90,0346/-. The return of income\nhas been accepted by the Id. AO as the assessed income and no additions have\nbeen made in the assessment order. However, the Id. AO initiated the penalty\nproceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on the surrendered income

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

68,523.18 and Rs. 13,93,625.00 without charging any interest. The landlord is the Director of the society Smt. Farhat Hasan. This leads to the benefit to the person referred to in section 13(3) and these investments are not allowable investment as per provision of section 11(5) of the I. T. Act which

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

business from A.Y.2014-15, almost zero turnover, no total income and no tangible assets, even in A.Y.2017-18 total revenue was Rs.60,84,041/- and taxable income was Rs.7,21,766/-. Therefore, the company having shareholders’ fund of Rs.50,00,94,532/- as on 31.03.2016 is paper company. The assessee never produced clarification and documentary evidence even after repeated requests during

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

business from A.Y.2014-15, almost zero turnover, no total income and no tangible assets, even in A.Y.2017-18 total revenue was Rs.60,84,041/- and taxable income was Rs.7,21,766/-. Therefore, the company having shareholders’ fund of Rs.50,00,94,532/- as on 31.03.2016 is paper company. The assessee never produced clarification and documentary evidence even after repeated requests during

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

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

business of manufacturing of Poultry Feed and Milling of Rice. The assessee is related to Sona Group of cases. The ld. Assessing Officer mentioned that notice under section 153A of the Income Tax Act was issued to the assessee on 29.08.2014. The assessee has filed return declaring ‘NIL’ income. The ld. Assessing Officer has nowhere mentioned whether search was carried

SAWITA SHAH,PURNIA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNIA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrasawita Shah, Income Tax Officer, W/O Kamal Kishor Gupta Sudi Ward 3(1), Purnia Tola, Ansari Thakur Tola, Vs Dalmapur, Baisi, Purnia, Bihar - 854315 (Pan: Gnzps0882J) (Appellant) (Respondent)

business, under section 68 previous year savings treated as unexplained income in the case of the appellant which is bad in fact

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

section 68, where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory in the opinion of the A.O., the sum so credited may be charged to Income Tax as the income

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

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

business or profession’ or “income from other sources” shall be determined according to the method of accountancy followed by the assessee, but such method ought to be in accordance with the conditions enumerated in sub- clause (2) of this section. The sub-clause (2) further provides that Central Government would notify in its Official Gazette from time to time

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

business entities. Consequently, a warrant of\nauthorization under section 132(1) of the Act, was issued to assessee and\nothers on 06/03/2019. Smt. Saroj Bala was director in two companies M/s\nLovely Rani Constructions Private Limited (LRCPL) and Janardana\nPharmacy Private Limited (JPPL). The assessee Smt. Saroj Bala is wife\nof Shri Murlidhar Prasad. Subsequently, notice u/s 153A