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

68 of the Act which\nis not correct section under this addition could be made. The case of\nthe assessee is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the\ncase of Ragini Verma Vs ACIT Circle-49(1), Kolkata in ITA\nNo.1361/KOL/2023 for A.Y.2017-18, order dated 13-06-2024. The\noperating part thereof is extracted as under

M/S MARUTI NANDAN FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 2(1), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

68 of the Act. 5 Maruti Nandan Food Products Pvt.Ltd. AY 2013-14 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The list of the loan creditors as contained in the assessment order is reproduced as under: S. No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 1. Arjun Singh 1,75,00,000/- 2. Bimla Singh 1,75

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)

Section 68 of the Act in respect of cash deposits during demonetization period as made by the Assessing Officer, then the same would result into double taxation because the same income has already been offered tax by filing return of income. The Assessing Officer has not disputed the sales and not even rejected the books of accounts. Therefore

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

75,500/- in PNB during the period from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016 and also 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

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

75,500/- in PNB during the period from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016 and also 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

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

75,000/- Natraj Filling Station 03-10-2008 SBI-436 297098 5,00,000/- Natraj Filling Station 03-10-2008 SBI-436 297099 5,00,000/- Natraj Filling Station 03-10-2008 SBI-436 297100 4,00,000/- Natraj Filling Station 03-10-2008 SBI-436 297097 4,00,000/- Nishant Kumar 07-01-2009 Dena

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

75. 8. Keeping in view the above mentioned peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the guess work adopted by the ld. AO in arriving at probable sales value and the judicial precedents relied upon, we find no reason to interfere with the factual findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.1

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

68" 10. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has very strangely has stated as under Addition upheld: Rs.107632265 whereas the Assessing Officer has assessed the assessee at Rs.32,28,967/- being 3% NP of alleged turnover determined at Rs.10,76,32,265/- 11. That on the facts and circumstances

CHANDRAKANTI,SAHARSA, BIHAR vs. ITO, SAHARSA, BIHAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 216/Pat/2024 (A.Y. 2017-2018) & I.T.A. No. 217/Pat/2024 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Chandrakanti,……………………..……..…………Appellant Shubham Fuels, Salkhuwa, Saharsa-852126, Bihar [Pan:Aeypc7137A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…..……………………….....Respondent Ward-3(4), Saharsa, Bihar Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 12, 2024 O R D E R

75,45,220/- in her return of income. Therefore, ld. Assessing Officer concluded that the difference of Rs.26,55,970/- is unexplained income and added the same to the total income under section 68

CHANDRAKANTI,SAHARSA, BIHAR vs. ITO, SAHARSA, BIHAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 216/Pat/2024 (A.Y. 2017-2018) & I.T.A. No. 217/Pat/2024 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Chandrakanti,……………………..……..…………Appellant Shubham Fuels, Salkhuwa, Saharsa-852126, Bihar [Pan:Aeypc7137A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…..……………………….....Respondent Ward-3(4), Saharsa, Bihar Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 12, 2024 O R D E R

75,45,220/- in her return of income. Therefore, ld. Assessing Officer concluded that the difference of Rs.26,55,970/- is unexplained income and added the same to the total income under section 68

BAJRANG CONSTRUCTION,GOPALGANJ vs. DCIT, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

75,185/- before salary and interest to partners and firm tax which comes to 2% of the gross contract receipt of Rs.3,87,09,872/-. The assessee was asked to furnish relevant details, but in spite of that, the assessee failed to produce bills/vouchers. There were many cash payments for different expenditures which make genuineness of expenses claimed highly doubtful

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

68,000\nPlaza\nS.G.\n97.37%\n19825\n14684\n74.07\n4,75,58,147\n3,74,24,102\n3,84,34,500\n10,10,398\nSmriti\nB.L.\n27.12%\n22355\n7641\n34.18\n1,79,05,051\n65,21,687\n2,40,47,530\n1,75,25,843\nSinghania\nAsha\n22.11%\n46165\n8754\n18.98\n19069421\nNil

ARANYA CLEARERS,GAYA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), GAYA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

75,80,629.86, whereas the assessee has shown receipt of Rs.5,68,27,840/-. There was a difference of Rs.7,52,789/-. This difference has been added in the total income of the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since it was an ex-parte assessment order, therefore, efforts to reconcile the above could not be achieved

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 premises of the assessee on 14.09.2017. 2 Assessment

RUBI KUMARI,SAMASTIPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (3), SAMASTIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.263/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rubi Kumari….……………………………. …………………....Appellant C/O Maa Tarini Auro Services, Belsanditara, Bibhutipur, Samastipur, Bihar- 848207. [Pan: Akupk7000Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(3), Samastipur…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.03.2025 Passed By The Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Ate That The Assessee Is An Individual & Derived Her Income From Petrol Pump. For The Assessment Year 2017- 18, The Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.9,75,504/-. The Assessing Officer Found During The Assessment Proceedings That There Was Discrepancy In Disclosing Of Closing Stock Amounting To Rs.264871/- & The Assessee Had Unexplained Expenditure Of Rs.10,68,685/- & The Assessee Received Undisclosed Interest From Investments Of Rs.31,006/- & There Was

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief facts of the case ate that the assessee is an individual and derived her income from petrol pump. For the assessment year 2017- 18, the assessee filed her return of income declaring total income of Rs.9,75,504/-. The Assessing Officer found during the assessment proceedings that there

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 read with Clause (a) of Explanation-21 thereunder. I, therefore, under the powers conferred u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereby set aside the order passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 153A/143(3) for AY 2015-16 with direction to pass fresh order after conducting proper enquiries, including third party enquiries and investigations into the claim

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 read with Clause (a) of Explanation-21 thereunder. I, therefore, under the powers conferred u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereby set aside the order passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 153A/143(3) for AY 2015-16 with direction to pass fresh order after conducting proper enquiries, including third party enquiries and investigations into the claim

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 read with Clause (a) of Explanation-21 thereunder. I, therefore, under the powers conferred u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereby set aside the order passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 153A/143(3) for AY 2015-16 with direction to pass fresh order after conducting proper enquiries, including third party enquiries and investigations into the claim

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

section 263 read with Clause (a) of Explanation-21 thereunder. I, therefore, under the powers conferred u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereby set aside the order passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 153A/143(3) for AY 2015-16 with direction to pass fresh order after conducting proper enquiries, including third party enquiries and investigations into the claim