Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Vinay Dalchand Mehta Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2022-23
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Vinay Dalchand Mehta Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) ITAT Mumbai Remands ₹5.9 Cr Addition Case – Assessee to Pay ₹25,000 Cost- Ex Parte Orders Set Aside – Matter Restored to AO Assessee, proprietor of M/s Vinayaka Metal Corporation, filed return declaring income of ₹21.11 lakh for AY 2022-23. AO, noting non-compliance to statutory notices, passed an ex parte order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B on 25.03.2024. He treated deposits in bank accounts as unaccounted sales of ₹7.42 crore & applied presumptive profit rate of 8% u/s 44AD, making an addition of ₹5.94 crore. Before CIT(A), Assessee argued...
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

Reopening Fails on Both Counts: Invalid Sec 148A Notice and Time-Barred Sec 148 Render Assessment Void Coffee Income: Rule 7B Overrides Rule 7 – ITAT Remands for Segregation of Own vs Purchased Produce Duty Drawback Taxable Only on Receipt – ITAT Deletes Addition & U/s 270A Penalty Skill Development = “Education” – ITAT Allows Sec 11 Exemption to Charitable Trust No Penalty for Wrong Claim or Head of Income – ITAT Deletes Section 271(1)(c) 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Your email address will not be published.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
April 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930