Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Geetanjali Anil Kankrej Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Geetanjali Anil Kankrej Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) Death, PAN Mismatch & Ignored Reply- Bank Deposits Already in Books? Tribunal Says ‘Verify First, Tax Later’-—Reassessment Remanded for Complete Recheck Assessee, engaged in liquor business, filed return declaring income of Rs.12,15,090/-. Reopening was triggered u/s 147 based on information that cash deposits of Rs.97,28,000/- in two Bank of Maharashtra accounts were linked to PAN of Late Smt. Sulochana, former owner of Kishor Wine Shop. AO issued notice u/s 148 but, according to him, Assessee did not respond. AO completed reassessment u/s ...
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Your email address will not be published.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