SAINATH SAKHARAM TARE,THANE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, THANE, THANE

PDF
ITA 3678/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 December 2024AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

A search and seizure action was conducted on Antariksh Group, an assessee providing contractual services. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee admitted to receiving cash of Rs. 2,50,40,070/- from Antariksha group and agreed to offer income at 5%. The AO initiated penalty proceedings under section 271DA for contravening section 269ST.

Held

The Tribunal found that although the appellant did not explain its case before the Ld. CIT(A) due to various reasons, the fact remained that the assessee was not heard before the impugned order was passed. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A).

Key Issues

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without granting an opportunity of being heard to the appellant, and whether the penalty under Section 271DA was rightly imposed.

Sections Cited

250, 153A, 153C, 143(3), 271DA, 269ST

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Kabra
For Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R.& Smt. Sujatha

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 3678/M/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Sainath Sakharam Tare Assistant Commissioner Survey No. 84-10/11, of Income Tax, Central Kalyan Padgha Road, Circle – 2, Thane Sape Village, Bhiwandi, Ashar IT Park, 6th Floor, Dist. Thane – 421302. Vs. Road No. 16z, Wagle PAN: AERPT8712M Industrial Estate, Thane – 400604. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Present for : Assessee by : Shri Gaurav Kabra Revenue by : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R.& Smt. Sujatha P. Iyangar – Sr. AR.

Date of Hearing : 05. 09 . 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 02 . 12 . 2024

O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member: 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the Order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act [the ‘Act’ in short]

3.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted in Antariksh Group on 14/02/2019 who is engaged in the construction of residential houses, warehousing and commercial retail development since many years. The

Sd/- Sd/- NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 02.12.2024. Snehal C. Ayare, Stenographer Copy to:The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy// By Order

Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

SAINATH SAKHARAM TARE,THANE vs ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, THANE, THANE | BharatTax