Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Kaushal Kumar Parmar Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-2019
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Kaushal Kumar Parmar Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) Assessee did not file ROI originally. Based on information regarding sale of immovable property and cash deposits, AO issued notice u/s 148. Assessee then filed return declaring income of ₹10,43,400. AO completed reassessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B, making a massive addition u/s 45 by taking the entire gross sale consideration of ₹7,26,82,500 as taxable capital gains, resulting in assessed income of ₹7,37,25,900. Before CIT(A)/NFAC, assessee did not attend hearings fixed on 05/03/2025, 19/03/2025, 05/05/2025 & 27/05/2025. CIT(A), therefore, passed...
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

Tenancy Rights Transfer Taxable Only on Possession: STCG Addition Deleted JDA May Trigger Transfer- But No Double Taxation Allowed: Karnataka HC Relief CIT(A) Enhancement Quashed for No Notice – ITAT Restores LTCG Issues to AO No Penalty When Quantum Deleted: 270A Cannot Survive Without Addition Heavy Contract Payments by Trust Under Scanner: Matter Remanded for Verification 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Your email address will not be published.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