Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Amtula Tasneen Heera Banu Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Amtula Tasneen Heera Banu Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) 54F Claim Rejected on Technicalities – Best-Judgment Addition of ₹3.10 Cr u/s 69A Set Aside; Matter Remanded—Penalty u/s 271AAC Also Cancelled Assessee, a 70-year-old senior citizen, sold property for ₹3.10 Cr (TDS ₹3,10,000) in AY 2018-19 but did not file ROI, stating that entire sale consideration was re-invested in new residential property of ₹3.07 Cr, making her eligible for exemption u/s 54F. AO issued notice u/s 148 (30.03.2022) & finding no response, completed best-judgment assessment u/s 144 r.w.s.147, treating full ...
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Your email address will not be published.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