MR VIKAS JAYRAM BHUKAN,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 12(3), PUNE
In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed
ITA 2483/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2025AY 2012-13
Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2483/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mr. Vikas Jayram Bhukan, Vs. Ito, Ward-12(3), Pune. Survey No.34, House No.80, Azad Chowk, Opposite Ramma, Lohegaon, Near Gram Panchayat, Pune- 411047. Pan : Alqpb0811K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani Revenue By : Shri Kumar Manish Singha Date Of Hearing : 08.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.09.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstance Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions & Scheme Of The Act It Be Held That The Notice For Levy Of Penalty Was Defective Since No Specific Charge Of Violation, Was Made Out In The Notice & Thus The Consequent Penalty So Levied Be Kindly Deleted.
For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Manish Singha
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274
u/s 271(1)(c) read with section 274
of the 1.T.Act, 1961 is ambiguous and vague because in the notice both furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income as well as concealment of income have been mentioned. In this regard, the appellant has mentioned various case laws which has been perused. Recently, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta
