PARAS NATH GUPTA,RAMNA ROAD , GAYA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DC/AC CIRCLE-I

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in\nview of the above directions

150. The case was selected for scrutiny due to large revenue operations and lack of scrutiny in prior years. The Assessing Officer (AO) rejected the assessee's books of account under Section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-production of supporting documents and estimated the net profit at 2% of the turnover, resulting

SMT. ANITA DEVI,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according to the Id. AO could not be\nexplained and accordingly, the same was added to the income of the\nassessee. The Id. AO noted that the assessee replied that the deposits\nwere made out of the agricultural income of Shri Sushil Kumar, HUF,\nhaving no bank account

SMT. ANITA DEVI,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according to the Id. AO could not be\nexplained and accordingly, the same was added to the income of the\nassessee. The Id. AO noted that the assessee replied that the deposits\nwere made out of the agricultural income of Shri Sushil Kumar, HUF,\nhaving no bank account

SMT. ANITA DEVI,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according to the Id. AO could not be\nexplained and accordingly, the same was added to the income of the\nassessee. The Id. AO noted that the assessee replied that the deposits\nwere made out of the agricultural income of Shri Sushil Kumar, HUF,\nhaving no bank account

SMT. ANITA DEVI,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according to the Id. AO could not be\nexplained and accordingly, the same was added to the income of the\nassessee. The Id. AO noted that the assessee replied that the deposits\nwere made out of the agricultural income of Shri Sushil Kumar, HUF,\nhaving no bank account

SMT. ANITA DEVI,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor’s Colony, Kankarbagh, patna, which according to the ld. AO could not be explained and accordingly, the same was added to the income of the assessee. The ld. AO noted that the assessee replied that the deposits were made out of the agricultural income of Shri Sushil Kumar, HUF, having no bank account

SMT. ANITA DEVI,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor’s Colony, Kankarbagh, patna, which according to the ld. AO could not be explained and accordingly, the same was added to the income of the assessee. The ld. AO noted that the assessee replied that the deposits were made out of the agricultural income of Shri Sushil Kumar, HUF, having no bank account