NEELAM GARG,KARNAL vs. ITO, WARD NO. 3, KARNAL
In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed
ITA 6250/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2013-14
Bench: Shri C.M. Gargneelam Garg, Vs. Ito, Hem Chand Jain, H. No. 2, Ward No. 3, Huda Staff Owarter, No. 1, Karnal Sector-13, Extn, Karnal, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ainpg2119D Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Sachdeva, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/06/2023
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sachdeva, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 54Section 54F
penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. therefore, I find identical facts and circumstances of the case quite similar and identical to the case of ITO Vs. M.
Narayanswami (supra) wherein, the tribunal held that the assessee has furnished all particulars regarding sale of immovable property and claimed exemption
