Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Late Jagdish Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
Related Assessment Year : 2007-08
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Late Jagdish Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) You’re Still Taxed After You’re Gone- But Your Heir Only Pays What’s in the Cupboard –Penalty Survives After Death but Legal Heir Liable Only to Extent of Inherited Assets – Section 159 Covers Tax & Penalty – Death Doesn’t Abate Penalty Proceedings- ITAT Jaipur The late assessee, Shri Jagdish, was assessed for AY 2007-08, in which the AO made two additions: ₹ 3,80,000 as unexplained cash deposits, & ₹ 14,62,758 as Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) u/s 50C on sale of land. A penalty of ₹ 3,96,929 u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed for ...
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

Reopening Fails on Both Counts: Invalid Sec 148A Notice and Time-Barred Sec 148 Render Assessment Void Coffee Income: Rule 7B Overrides Rule 7 – ITAT Remands for Segregation of Own vs Purchased Produce Duty Drawback Taxable Only on Receipt – ITAT Deletes Addition & U/s 270A Penalty Skill Development = “Education” – ITAT Allows Sec 11 Exemption to Charitable Trust No Penalty for Wrong Claim or Head of Income – ITAT Deletes Section 271(1)(c) Penalty 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Your email address will not be published.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