Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Bevinakuppe Ningegowda Vs ITO (Karnataka High Court)
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Bevinakuppe Ningegowda Vs ITO (Karnataka High Court) Give Me 7 Days or Give It Up! – HC tells Taxman: 5-Day Notice = 0% Validity; Giving Less Than 7 Days to Reply u/s 148A(b) is Fatal – Entire Reassessment & Penalty Quashed -Karnataka High Court In this case, Assessee approached the Karnataka High Court challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2018-19. The challenge was not on the merits of the addition but on a fundamental procedural illegality: the notice issued u/s 148A(b) did not grant the mandatory minimum period of seven days to respond. The noti...
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

Interest on Delayed Sales Tax, Service Tax & PF Payments Deductible; TDS Interest Disallowed: Patna ITAT Section 54F Deduction Allowed on Genuine House Purchase from In-Laws: Mumbai ITAT Pune ITAT Quashes Reassessment as Section 148A(b) & 148A(d) Reasons Differed Section 54 Relief Can’t Be Denied Merely Due to Section 50C Addition: Pune ITAT Delhi ITAT Deletes Penny Stock Addition; Suspicion Can’t Replace Evidence 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Your email address will not be published.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
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031