Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Nagabhushanam & Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Nagabhushanam & Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) ITAT Hyderabad Upholds PCIT’s Section 263 Revision – 99% Subcontracting Expenses Not Verified by AO- GST Statement Exposed Bogus Subcontracts Background Assessee filed ROI (30.10.2018) declaring ₹3.94 Cr income. Flagged under risk management – AO noted ITC claim of ₹1.12 Cr based on invoices from 3 subcontractors (GJS Infratech, Sri Laxmi Constructions, Roll-on Projects) without actual supply. AO reopened u/s 147; reassessment completed on 15.02.2023 without any addition. PCIT invoked s.263 (04.03.2025), holding AO failed to verify gen...
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Your email address will not be published.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