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)

deposited into the bank was out of cash available in the cash book which is ultimately out of cash sales effected by the assessee during the year. However, the Assessing Officer computed the disallowance at Rs. 1,00,23,684/- and added the same under Section 68

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

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

AJAY KUMAR KESHAN,BETTIAH vs. DC/AC, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 3/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Ajay Kumar Keshan,.……………………………Appellant M/S. Abhijeet Service Station, Sowa Babu Chowk, Lal Bazar Bettiah, West Champaran-845438, Bihar [Pan:Abapk5421A] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner /Assistant Commissioner,......................Respondent Circle-1, Muzaffarpur-842002, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Vineet Jalan, Ca & Shri Rajaram Choudhury, Ca, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 28, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 30, 2024 O R D E R

section 68 cannot be invoked. He pleaded to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities. 3 Ajay Kumar Keshan 6. On the other hand, ld. D.R. has submitted that as per the cash book, the assessee is not having sufficient cash on hand to make the deposits

ANIL KUMAR SAH,BANKA vs. ITO, WD-1(4), BHAGALPUR, BHAGALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 324/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Anil Kumar Sah,………………………....….………Appellant Near Bari Durga Mandir, Kajreli Road, Amarpur, Dist. Banka-813101, Bihar [Pan:Aqgps8735A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………...…….Respondent Ward-1(4), Bhagalpur, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, R.N. Plaza, R B S S Road, Bhagalpur-812001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 29, 2025 O R D E R

section 143(3) on total income of Rs.18,96,822/- making addition to the tune of Rs.13,63,773/- on account of difference of deposits in bank and remittance to Insurance Companies through SBI account and addition to the tune of Rs.2,06,932/- with regard to Cash deposit of Rs.1,68

SURYADEO PRASAD,SIWAN vs. ITO WARD-2 (3), SIWAN

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 44AD should have been applied an income should have been calculated accordingly. 7 For that the taxable income should have been calculated after allowing the exemption limit under Income Tax Act for the assessment year under consideration. 8 For that, other ground, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case

SUDHIR KUMAR SINGH HUF,SAHARSA vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

deposited in Bank Account out of Cash in hand, cannot be treated “Cash Credit” within the meaning of section 68

RAJBANSH RAM,BHABUA vs. ITO WARD- 3(5), SASARAM

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 68 of the Act by the Ld. CIT(A). 6. Before us, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the total deposits in the bank account were Rs. 11,58,97,154/- comprising Rs. 9,40,38,210/- in cash

KRISHNA MOHAN ,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-14, PATNA , PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Krishna Mohan Prop-M/S Maa Ambey Traders, Acit, Circle-14, Patna Maurari Complex, Karbigahiya, Patna, Bihar Vs. Patna-800001, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahupm5205C Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Md. Ah Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2025

68 to section 69, that too, without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. More so, when applicability of section 69 was never within the purview of the Tribunal and not even the case of the Department. I don’t intend to deal further on the issue as to whether the Tribunal has powers to change the provision

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 of the Act. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the 1st Appellate Authority. 3. The ld. CIT(Appeals) observed that the assessee failed to give any explanation before the ld. Assessing Officer about the nature of source of cash deposits

PRERNA AGENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

deposits represented opening cash balance (as on 01.04.2016) and cash withdrawals made from time to time. The Ld. AO has depicted in tabular form at pages 2 to 6 of his order about the cash withdrawals from time to time made by the assessee. However, the Ld. AO did not believe the claim of the assessee that considering their business

RANJEET SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (5), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

cash deposited during the period of demonetization. Accordingly, a sum of Rs. 30,50,000/- was treated as unexplained money of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act and the total income was assessed at Rs. 30,50,000/-. 5. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide order dated

JAINAM ORNAMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,GAYA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GAYA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Jainam Ornament Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Chowk, Gaya, Gaya, Gaya, Bihar Vs. Bihar-823001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcj2187M Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2026

deposit during the demonetisation period, but the appellant failed to submit documentary evidences like sale vouchers, details of stock purchase, closing stock month wise and various other details. On perusal of the details of cash sales made during the demonetisation period, it is clear that the assessee has miss-utilised the provisions of the scheme, the appellant was supposed

BIRJU KUMAR,VAISHALI vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (3), VAISHALI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

cash deposited in the bank account under section 68 of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 4. For that

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. SHREE NANAK FERRO ALLOYS PVT LTD, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Shree Nanak Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-2 Room No.205, 2Nd Floor, Avrtar Acit, Circle-2, Patna, Bihar Vs. Building, Bisturpur, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaics1706N Assessee By : S/Shri A.K. Rastogi Rakesh Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Md Ah Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2025

deposit in the name of Mr. Annad Agarwal and Amit Purohit and then the cash was transferred to the current account of M/s Mahalaxmi Steel and then advanced ₹2,49,79,400, to the assessee’s account. Thereafter, during the assessment proceeding the learned Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has stated that it had received payment to the tune

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

cash credit under section 68 read with section 115BBE of the Act and assessed the same under the Act. I.T.A. No.: 321/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Zaimur Rahman. 11. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer, without giving any opportunity, much less sufficient opportunity, has erred in holding that Rs.11

MANOJ KUMAR DAS,BEGUSARAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: 19/07/2025. The Appeal Is Delayed By Around 37 Days. 4. That The Assessee States That The Reason For Delay Is That The Assessee Is Suffering From Hiv Aids & Is Constantly Under Treatment. Copy Of Medical Treatment Is Enclosed.

cash deposits aggregating to Rs.1,16,00,000 in ICICI Bank bearing bank account no. 255605500035 is unexplained investment in purchase of property credited from undisclosed sources u/s 68 read with section

PIONEER EDUCATION SOCIETY,HARYANA vs. ITO, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

deposited cash aggregating to Rs.12,68,85,400/- in the said Bank account during the period 2 Jaya Singh from 01.04.2016 to 08.11.2016. On the basis of information, the case of the appellant was reopened under section

JAYA SINGH,PATNA vs. DC,AC CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR, BHAGALPUR, BIHAR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

deposited cash aggregating to Rs.12,68,85,400/- in the said Bank account during the period 2 Jaya Singh from 01.04.2016 to 08.11.2016. On the basis of information, the case of the appellant was reopened under section

JITENDRA SINGH,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

cash deposits of Rs. 6,91,050/- and due to this, the AO invoke the provisions of section 68 of the Act. Considering