2020 (2) TMI 1746

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....u/s 271(1)(c). Since impugned order is common order for all the years, the appeals were heard together and are now being disposed-off by way of this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. It is admitted position that adjudication in any one year shall apply to other years also. 1.2 In the above background, the grounds raised by the assessee in AY 2006-07 read as under: - 1. Whether the CIT (A) was justified by deciding the appeal without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 2. Whether the CIT (A) was justified by upholding the Penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) which is neither only contrary to law but also beyond the order of Hon'ble ITAT on the quantum Appeal, void ab-initio because it....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee was subjected to search action u/s 132 on 07/10/2009 wherein certain cash and Jewellery was found and inventorized. It also transpired that the assessee actually managed and controlled the affairs of an entity namely M/s Akruti Metals and Alloys Ltd. for providing accommodation entries to various persons including M/s ABG Shipyard Ltd. After considering the factual matrix, Ld.AO estimated commission income against accommodation entries @1.5% which resulted into an addition of Rs. 1,49,250/- in the hands of the assessee. Consequently, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) were initiated in the assessment order. 3.2 In the meantime, the matter of estimation of commission income reached up-to the level of this Tribunal vide ITA Nos.&n....