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

PDF · subscribers
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

What did the Tribunal hold?

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).

What were the 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.

What were the 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.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 153A,Section 153C,Section 143(3),Section 271DA,Section 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

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]

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →