Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sanand Sankardas Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2015-16
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sanand Sankardas Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Assessee , a Non-Resident Indian (NRI) residing & working in Dubai, was assessed for AY 2015–16. His case was reopened u/s 147 & notice u/s 148 was issued by the AO of Ward 34(3)(5), Mumbai, who proceeded to make an addition of ₹36.12 lakhs u/s 69 for unexplained investment in a property purchased in Kerala. Assessee argued that he was non-resident during the year & jurisdiction rested with the International Taxation Officer, not the AO who issued the notice, the property investment was made from funds remitted from abroad & that th...
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

Interest on Delayed Sales Tax, Service Tax & PF Payments Deductible; TDS Interest Disallowed: Patna ITAT Section 54F Deduction Allowed on Genuine House Purchase from In-Laws: Mumbai ITAT Pune ITAT Quashes Reassessment as Section 148A(b) & 148A(d) Reasons Differed Section 54 Relief Can’t Be Denied Merely Due to Section 50C Addition: Pune ITAT Delhi ITAT Deletes Penny Stock Addition; Suspicion Can’t Replace Evidence 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Your email address will not be published.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
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031