Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Jaivir Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Related Assessment Year : 2012-13
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Jaivir Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) AO’s Reliance on Repealed Law Costs Revenue Dear – Reopening Without Application of Mind Invalid: Facts: No return originally filed for AY 2012-13. AO received information of cash deposits ₹17.40 lakh in Punjab National Bank during FY 2011-12. Notice u/s 148 issued (29.03.2019) with prior approval u/s 151. Assessee filed return on 29.10.2019, explained deposits as sale proceeds of agricultural land. AO rejected explanation, added ₹17.40 lakh u/s 69A as unexplained cash deposits; also added bank interest ₹44,782 & disallowed deduction u/s VIA. CIT(A...
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Your email address will not be published.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