Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Majid Khan Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Majid Khan Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) 132(4) vs 153C Gap Closed -Two Heads, One Disclosure: ITAT Deletes Rs.8.82 Lakh After Full Telescoping Assessee, engaged in real estate business, was covered u/s 153C pursuant to search on Shahnawaz Group on 25.10.2017. In the statement recorded u/s 132(4), additional income of Rs.40 crores was collectively disclosed in the hands of Shahnawaz, Mohammad Zubairuddin & Assessee. For AY 2016-17, Assessee’s share of additional income was stated as Rs.87,21,138/-. However, in the return filed on 13.12.2019, Assessee admitted only Rs.20,66,692/-. AO therefore...
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

Delay Condoned with Cost: ITAT Grants Fresh Chance, Slams Non-Compliance Section 153C Valid but Addition Fails: No Incriminating Material = No Deemed Dividend 870-Day Delay Not Condoned: ITAT Refuses Relief, Calls Out Negligence & “No Sufficient Cause” Wrong Section Claim Not Fatal: ITAT Remands Matter & Nullifies Penalty Penalty U/s 270A Quashed: No Specific Charge of “Misreporting” = No 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Your email address will not be published.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
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031