MARPUDI PUSHKALA RANI ,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-2(1),, GUNTUR
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 468/VIZ/2018[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 2008-2009
Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blesmt. Marpudi Pushkala Rani, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), D.No. 12-7-110/2, Flat No. 304, Guntur. Smr Vinay Elegance, Kesavanagar Colony, Mettuguda, Secunderabad. Pan No. Awmpm 8121 E (Appellant) (Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274
148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act').
In response, the assessee filed return and admitted income of Rs.96,530/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has made the addition of Rs. 13,98,446/- being advance received from the company. Consequent to that, penalty notice was issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271