SMT B SUMATHY,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(2)(2), BANGALORE
In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2005-06 is allowed as indicated above
ITA 1777/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Apr 2019AY 2005-06
Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2005-06 Smt. B. Sumathy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, #T-401, Poorva Park, Ward – 1(2), Now Jeevana Halli Main Road, Ito, Ward – 1[2][2], Cox Town, Bangalore-560 005. Bangalore. Pan : Aseps 7079 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. T. Chandrasekhar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.04.2019
For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. T. Chandrasekhar, Addl. CIT
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)
u/s 274 r.ws 271 of the Act without specifying the nature of default; i.e. whether the notice is issued for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income; is invalid and the consequential penalty proceedings/orders are also not valid. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court (Supra) at paras
