Facts
A search and seizure action was conducted on the Antariksh Group, which engaged the assessee for contractual services. During the search, documents related to the assessee were seized, leading the Assessing Officer (AO) to assess the assessee's income under section 153A r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act. The AO questioned cash receipts and later initiated penalty proceedings under section 271 DA for contravention of section 269 ST.
Held
The Tribunal noted that while the assessee may not have fully explained its case before the CIT(A), the fact remained that the assessee was not heard before the impugned order was passed. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without granting sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and whether the action of the AO in assessing income and levying penalty was valid.
Sections Cited
153A, 153C, 143(3), 271 DA, 269 ST, 250
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
O R D E R
Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member:
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] vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1065032178(1) Dated 21/05/2024 for the Assessment Year 2014-15.