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

68 "it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the Page 8 of 19 I.T.A. No.: 304/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjeet Singh. identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". 8.4 Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal)], it was observed that

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

149 of the Act. 9. 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 the cash deposits aggregating to Rs.62,25,000 in State Bank of India during the Financial Year 2014-15 corresponding to Assessment Year

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

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) has observed that the assessee-company has taken a loan of Rs.1,06,02,895/- from M/s. Trailblazer Edusol (P) Limited and concurring his view with regard

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

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) has observed that the assessee-company has taken a loan of Rs.1,06,02,895/- from M/s. Trailblazer Edusol (P) Limited and concurring his view with regard

FARIDI FOUNDATION,ARRAH vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PATNA

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

149, 34, 39, 93, 61, 861, 68, 22, 353, 242 and so\nmany others like these. All the sums claimed to have been taken in cash.\nGoing through the list it appears the name \"Muhammad Jugnu Khan\" with\nPage | 4\nΙ.Τ.Α. No.: 223/PAT/2023\n Assessment Year: 2023-24\nFaridi Foundation.\nsame address and mobile number

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S ASHA REALTY DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

149 days in filing the appeal by the department in support of which a condonation petition was filed. It was stated in the condonation petition that the delay has occurred due to time taken in obtaining the administrative approvals from the competent authorities, which took quite a long time and accordingly, the delay being beyond the control may be condoned