Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Changappa Pemmaiah Biddamada Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Changappa Pemmaiah Biddamada Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) No Second Bite at the Cherry- ‘Set Aside’ u/s 264 means Assessment Quashed – AO cannot Redo without Fresh Directions Assessee faced an addition of ₹20.78 lakh towards cash deposits in his bank account. The original assessment was completed ex parte u/s 144 on 27.12.2019. Aggrieved, assessee filed a revision petition u/s 264. PCIT, by order dated 28.03.2021, set aside the assessment order with the observation that the assessee must regularly check the income-tax portal for departmental communications. Following this, however, AO onc...
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Your email address will not be published.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