MSC AGENCY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-2(2)(2) , MUMBAI

ITA 928/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 December 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order upholding the initiation of penalty proceedings was premature as the AO had not issued a show cause notice after the assessment order. Therefore, the CIT(A) had no locus standi to adjudicate on the issue at that stage.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction for education cess, which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A for under-reporting of income. The CIT(A) upheld the initiation of penalty proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) could uphold the initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 270A when the AO had not issued a show cause notice post-assessment order. The validity of penalty proceedings initiation without proper procedural compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 143(3),Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Nirmal, Ms. Tejal Saraf
For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Hearing: 14.10.2024Pronounced: 31.12.2024

Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These appeals have been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Years (‘A.Y.’ for short) 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2020-21. 2. As the facts are common in all the appeals, we hereby take ITA No. 927/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2017-18) as a lead case.

3.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: On the facts and i

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →