Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Venkata Prasad Pulipati Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Venkata Prasad Pulipati Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) Wrong Boss Signed, Reopening Dies: ITAT Quashes 148 for Want of PCIT/PCDG Sanction The Visakhapatnam Bench of the ITAT quashed the reassessment framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B for AY 2016-17 on the ground of lack of valid sanction u/s 151. The notice u/s 148 dated 27-07-2022 was issued beyond three years from the end of the relevant AY. As per Section 151(ii) (post-Finance Act, 2021), such reopening mandatorily requires approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner / Principal Director General (or CCIT/DG). In the present case, the approval was obt...
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Your email address will not be published.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