2019 (4) TMI 951

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iled the appeal on 12.12.2017 against which the appeal was filed on 15.03.2018 with a delay of 98 days. The assessee filed condonation petition stating that his wife was undergoing medical treatment for uterus cancer and he has to attend his wife for various medical consultations and treatment, therefore, the appeal could not be filed in time, hence requested to condone the delay. We have heard both the parties and convinced that there is a reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeal, accordingly, the delay is condoned. 3. In this case, the assessee filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 13,17,360/- and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on total income of Rs. 33,33,300/-. During the assessment proceedings, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s not require verification of facts or need further investigations. Therefore, after hearing both the parties, the additional ground raised by the assessee is admitted. 6. We have gone through the notice issued by the AO dated 10.05.2012 which is reproduced hereunder : 6.1. In the said notice, the AO did not strike off irrelevant column and made known to the assessee the specific charge for initiating the proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The assessment order is also silent on the initiation of proceedings, whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. It is settled issue by Hon'ble High Court of An....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rook interference on any ground. We find no question of law, much less a substantial one, arising for consideration warranting admission of this appeal." On the similar facts, the Hon'ble ITAT, Visakhapatnam in the case of Konchada Sreeram(ITA No.388/Viz/2015) following the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court cited supra and its own decision in the cases of Narayana Reddy Enterprises (229/Viz/2015) and Smt.Makina Annapurna (ITA Nos.604 & 605/Vizag/2014) held that non-striking of the irrelevant column renders the notice issued u/s 271 as invalid. 6.2. In the instant case as discussed above, the AO did not strike out the irrelevant column. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Hig....