Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Kiran Reddy Muddasa Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2012-2013
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Kiran Reddy Muddasa Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) Appeal Cannot Be Dismissed Merely for Two PANs; ITAT Remands Case for Verification of Cash Deposits & Deletes Consequential Penalty Assessee, engaged in catering business, regularly filed returns since AY 2009-10 under a new PAN (BFTPM6705H) after allegedly losing the old PAN (AQOPK2022J). AO issued notice u/s 148 on the old PAN based on cash deposits of ₹85.31 lakh in an HDFC Bank account linked to that PAN. As there was no response, AO passed an ex-parte reassessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 treating the deposits as unexplained money u/s 69A....
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Your email address will not be published.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