MANISH KUMAR SAGU(HUF),RANCHI vs. ACIT, C.C.-2, RANCHI
In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed
ITA 26/RAN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15
Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.26/Ran/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Manish Kumar Sahu (Huf)..…...………………......................……...…..….. Appellant 201, Krishna Apartment, Ratu Road, Ranchi-834001. [Pan: Aaghm3591N] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Ranchi…..…..………..…….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28 , 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.01.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)
penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
3. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that a search and seizure action u/s 132(4) was carried out on the premises of the assessee and during the search action, no incriminating material was found. However, the search party extracted the statement
