9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1924X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Tech Group of Educational Institutions and his family members, in which Smt. R. Mahalakshmi, the assessee, the daughter of Shri R. Rangarajan was also covered. Before the search and seizure operation, the assessee filed her return u/s. 139 admitting a total income of Rs. 33,91,800/- on 17.10.2008. The assessee has not admitted any undisclosed income u/s. 132(4). Post search and seizure enquiry, the Revenue got confirmation from the sellers of the plots that they received on money payments from the assessee, when the said facts were brought to the assessee, she had admitted the on-money receipts of Rs. 2,46,30,500/-. Subsequently, on issue of notice u/s. 153A, the assessee filed a return admitting the total income of Rs. 2,02,62,800/- on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was busy in connection with the tax audit matters and hence he could not appear for the hearing. 4. The CIT(A) misinterpreted the order of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 986/2013 in assessee's own case and illogically confirmed the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c). 5. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has nowhere recorded that it is reinstating the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) 6. The CIT(A) ought to have quashed the order of the Assessing Officer in reinstating the penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c). 7. Any other ground that may be adduced at the time of hearing." 5. The AR inviting our attention to the ITAT order submitted that the assessee's appeal in ITA No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing for 04.10.2017, none appeared and hence the CIT(A) has passed the impugned order appreciating the facts. In view of that, the DR pleaded that the order of the CIT(A) may be confirmed.
6. We heard the rival contentions. Considering the fact that the order appealed is against the penalty order, we are of the opinion that the assessee should be given an opportunity of being heard before the appeal is disposed off and hence we remit the issue back to the CIT(A) for giving a reasonable opportunity to assessee and then pass a speaking order.
7. In the result, the assessee's appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on Thursday, the 08th day of February, 2018 at Chennai. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
