S.CHINATALLI,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , PALACOLE
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 74/VIZ/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Aug 2019AY 2008-09
Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blesmt. S. Chinatalli, Vs. Ito, Ward-1, 9-16-37/2, Gurujada Enclave, Palakol. Cbm Compound, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Agrpc 1150 E (Appellant) (Respondent)
For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.V. Subba Rao– Sr.DR
Section 271BSection 44A
section 44AB. Under these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the explanation given by the assessee is bonafide and also justified, no penalty can be levied u/sec. 271B of the Act. In a similar circumstances, the coordinate bench of the tribunal in the case of K.V.V. Prasad
(supra) who is also entered into agreement
