Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Mahesh Ratilal Ganatra Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Mahesh Ratilal Ganatra Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) UK Not OK for Notice! – ITAT Delhi Deletes Penalty as 142(1) Never Reached the NRI in Britain; Penalty Quashed as Notice Not Served – ITAT Delhi Holds Service, Not Mere Issuance, is Mandatory for 142(1) Compliance Assessee, a Non-Resident Indian residing in the UK, did not file any return of income for AY 2018-19 since he had no income accruing or arising in India. AO levied a penalty of ₹10,000 u/s 272A(1)(d) for alleged non-compliance with a notice u/s 142(1) dated 06.01.2023. Assessee contended that no such notice was ever served upon him &...
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Your email address will not be published.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