ITO, WARD-1(EXEMPTION), PATNA vs. AISHWARYA FOUNDATION, PATNA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 103/Pat/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Aishwarya Foundation, Patna Exemption Vs 46, Patliputra Colony Near Sahyog Hospital Patliputra Colony Patna - 800013 [Pan: Aacta0834A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, Patna, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 10/09/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Sole Issue Raised By The Department Before Us In The Instant Lis Relates To The Deletion Of Addition Of Rs.2,61,72,000/- By The Ld. Cit(A) Made By The Assessing Officer In The Assessment Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 30/12/2016 On Account Of Alleged Anonymous Donations Made U/S 115Bbc Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Trust Is A Charitable Organization Registered U/S 12Aa Of Act. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 24/06/2015 Declaring Total Income At ‘Nil’. Case Of Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass Followed By Issuance Of Notice U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noted From The Income & Expenditure Account That The Assessee Had Shown Income At Rs.2,61,72,000/- Which Was Received As Donation & Incurred Expenses To The Tune Of Rs.2,22,47,910/- Which Resulted In Income Over Expenditure At

section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked. This inference is further reinforced by the following judicial pronouncements : 1. Income Tax Officer-II(3) Lucknow Vs. M/s Saraswati Educational CharitableTrust, ITAT, Lucknow 'A'Bench in ITA No.776/LKW/2014. I.T.A. No. 103/Pat/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Aishwarya Foundation, Patna 7 2. DIT(Exemptions) Vs. Keshav Social & Charitable Trust (Delhi

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/- as 'Advance to Landlord'. At the same time, the Society has paid Rs. 18,00,000/- as rent (to the landlords). The landlords in question are also the members of the Society or their family members. Thus, the assessee -Society is directly passing the benefits to its members. The Society is, therefore, not existing solely for education

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

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

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 44AD(5) according to which if an assessee claims that the profits from the business are lower than the profits and gains as specified in sub section (1) then, the assessee

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

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 44AD(5) according to which if an assessee claims that the profits from the business are lower than the profits and gains as specified in sub section (1) then, the assessee

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

2 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 Mithilesh Kumar weighing 5874.76 grams and the remaining gold ornaments weighing 12415.92 grams was found to be unexplained. A survey operation under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on the business premises of the assessee on 10.10.2020. The gold jewellery intercepted by the SHO, Police Station GRP, Patna was requisitioned

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

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

72,640/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) of\nthe Act was issued on 21.12.2018. The questionnaires were issued on\n24.09.2018 along with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act. It was observed\nby the Id. AO that during the course of search assessee had deposited\ncash of ₹68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according

SHANKAR CONSTRUCTION,PANCHGACHIA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 565/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Shankar Construction,………………..…….……Appellant Panchgachia, Panchgachia-852124, Bihar [Pan:Abofs0800R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………….……..……Respondent Ward-3(1), Purnea, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashok Kumar, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 18, 2024 O R D E R

2 each and hold 0.92% share holding in DB. Further, it was also observed that M/s New KMS Finance Pvt. Ltd had made huge investments in different companies and source of these investments was the securities premium of Rs. 72, 00, 02,200/- received from various Kolkata based companies. After due analysis, it was found that the source of securities

SITARAM SULTANIA,PATNA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIR-6, PATNA, PATNA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 50C(2) of the Act at Rs. 86,72,000/-. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer computed the short-term capital gain at Rs. 25,43,630/- on the basis of DVO report and added the same to the in- come of the assessee. We note that the DVO in its report dated 26.03.2015 categorically mentioned the method of valuation

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

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

72,640/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) of\nthe Act was issued on 21.12.2018. The questionnaires were issued on\n24.09.2018 along with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act. It was observed\nby the Id. AO that during the course of search assessee had deposited\ncash of ₹68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according

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

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

72,640/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) of\nthe Act was issued on 21.12.2018. The questionnaires were issued on\n24.09.2018 along with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act. It was observed\nby the Id. AO that during the course of search assessee had deposited\ncash of ₹68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according

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

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

72,640/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) of\nthe Act was issued on 21.12.2018. The questionnaires were issued on\n24.09.2018 along with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act. It was observed\nby the Id. AO that during the course of search assessee had deposited\ncash of ₹68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor's Colony,\nKankarbagh, patna, which according

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), NAGPUR vs. KHARE AND TARKUNDE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roydcit, Central Circle-2(1), Khare & Tarkunde Nagpur Vs Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 235, Shivaji Complex, Dharmpeth, Nagpur Pan : Aaack 7184 N Department Assessee Assessee By : Shri Sachin V. Luthra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.04.2026 O R D E R

68 iv) Noida Cyber Part (P) Ltd. vs. ITO [2021] 186 ITD 593 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue for adjudication is whether section 43CA applies to transfer of TDRs. We find that section 43CA specifically applies to transfer of an asset, being land or building or both, held

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

72,640/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 21.12.2018. The questionnaires were issued on 24.09.2018 along with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act. It was observed by the ld. AO that during the course of search assessee had deposited cash of ₹68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor’s Colony, Kankarbagh, patna, which according

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

72,640/-. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 21.12.2018. The questionnaires were issued on 24.09.2018 along with notices u/s 142(1) of the Act. It was observed by the ld. AO that during the course of search assessee had deposited cash of ₹68,293/- with Punjab National bank, Doctor’s Colony, Kankarbagh, patna, which according

AMIT KUMAR,BEGUSARAI vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 143(3) r.w. 144 of the Income tax Act, 1961, ('the Act') at an income of Rs 3,74,76,426/- as against returned income of Rs 10,16,880/- ITA No.: 410/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Amit Kumar. 2. For that the learned has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case in arbitrarily confirming addition