2025 (3) TMI 1917

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Neha Sahay, D.R. ORDER PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 15.10.2024 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069661868(1) for the AY 2015-16 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "The Act"). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....law and void ab-initio since the proceedings have been initiated on a defective notice issued and consequently, the order levying penalty is bad in law and the same deserves to be cancelled. 4. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT[A]/NFAC is not justified in upholding the penalty of Rs. 12,81,000/- u/s. 271AAB of the Act without appreciating that the additions made in the asses....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e at Rs. 87,56,082/- by making the following additions: a) Business income Rs. 27,21,336/- b) Cash seized Rs. 4,93,000/- c) Jewellery seized Rs. 16,42,900/-     Rs. 48,57,236/- 3.1 Thereafter, the ld. AO passed the impugned penalty order u/s 271AAB of the Act dated 11.10.2017 by holding that as the assessee has undisclosed income to the extent of Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... two additions made in the assessment proceedings and therefore, penalty imposed requires to be vacated since the very quantum addition itself stands deleted. 4. Ld. D.R. on the other hand supported the order of the authorities below but could not controvert to the arguments advanced by the ld. A.R. of the assessee. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available o....