Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Birju Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Birju Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata) Ex-Parte 144 Order & 115BBE Addition Set Aside- Demonetisation Cash Deposit Addition Remanded—ITAT Patna Gives Assessee One Final Chance Assessee, engaged in jewellery & mobile business, filed ROI declaring ₹5,24,260. Case was selected under CASS. Due to non-compliance to statutory notices, AO completed ex-parte assessment u/s 144, treated cash deposits of ₹49,80,700 made during demonetisation as unexplained u/s 68, taxed it @ 60% u/s 115BBE & assessed income at ₹55,04,960. Before CIT(A), despite four hearing notices, Assessee failed to fur...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

ITAT Bangalore Remands ₹49L Sec 68 Addition & ₹3.74L TDS Disallowance for Fresh Verification Vague Purpose in Form 10? ITAT Gives Trust a Second Chance Foreign Tax Credit Cannot Be Denied for Late Form 67 – Bang ITAT Allows Substantive Relief CIT(A) Cannot Enhance on New Issue; JDA Additions & U/s 2(22)(e) Deletions Upheld No Exempt Income = No U/s 14A Disallowance – ITAT Bangalore Reaffirms Settled Law View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
April 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930