SHRI PRAKASH F.SINGH,,VAPI vs. THE ITO, WARD-7,, VAPI
In the result, appeals of the Assessees (in ITA No
ITA 618/SRT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2021AY 2011-12
Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.618/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Prakash F Singh, The Income Tax Officer, V Ward-7, Room No.810, 8Th Floor, Rbl, 63/751, Chanod Colony, Gidc, S. Vapi-396195 Fortune Square-Ii, Vapi Daman Road, Chala, Vapi-396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Asnps 4835N (Assessee) (Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri A. Gopalakrishnan,C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. AnupamaSingla– Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)
B), as the deeming provisions, create a legal fiction as to the grounds for penalty proceedings. Indeed, the Apex Court in CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal
[2009] 183 Taxman 444/317 ITR 1, has explained the scope of section 271(1)(c) thus:
"[E]xplanation 1, appended to section 27(1) provides that if that person fails to offer an explanation