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)
132(4) at Rs.15 lacs and requested not to impose penalty under section 271(1)(c). The Assessing Officer imposed the penalty by invoking the Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c). For imposing the penalty under Explanation 5A on the basis of statement recorded during the course of search, it is necessary to be found incriminating documents
