Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : ACIT Vs Pawan Kumar Bansal (ITAT Delhi)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
ACIT Vs Pawan Kumar Bansal (ITAT Delhi) Protective Additions Collapse with Substantive Case, WhatsApp Chats Can’t Tax Mere Demands: Delhi ITAT Delhi ITAT, Delhi Benches ‘B’, in ACIT Vs Pawan Kumar Bansal (ITA Nos. 4799, 4800 & 4801/Del/2024; AYs 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20; order dated 19-12-2025), dismissed all three Revenue appeals and upheld the relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) in proceedings u/s 153C. For AY 2017-18, the Tribunal confirmed deletion of protective addition of ₹2.40 crore u/s 69A, holding that once the substantive addition in the case of Capital Power Systems L...
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

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930