Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Neeta Chaudhary Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Neeta Chaudhary Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) Faceless AO Ignored Evidence of Family Funding – Tribunal Restores Justice for Homemaker- Addition u/s 69A for Unexplained Investment Deleted – Proof of Source from Son’s Bank Account Ignored by AO & CIT(A) Assessee, an individual homemaker, had not filed her return for AY 2016-17. AO noticed that she purchased a residential flat worth ₹70.64 lakh during FY 2015-16. On enquiry u/s 133(6), the seller confirmed receipt of payments by cheques & TDS of ₹70,600 was deducted. Since Assessee failed to satisfactorily explain the source of funds...
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

No Specific Charge, No Penalty: Mumbai ITAT Cancels Section 270A Levy for Defective Notice Mere Investigation Wing Alert Is Not ‘Reason to Believe’: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Reopening Liquor Trader Gets Relief as ITAT Reduces GP Rate to 3.13% & Deletes Separate Expense Disallowance From Clean Chit to Crores in Penalty: SEBI Reopens Suzlon Case and Strikes Hard ITAT Restores Section 69 Matter to AO After Ex Parte Assessment and Appeal Orders 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Your email address will not be published.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