Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Chandrakant Kantilal Patel (HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Chandrakant Kantilal Patel (HUF) Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) Reassessment Quashed for Ignoring Reply Filed Under Section 148A(b): ITAT Slams ‘Borrowed Satisfaction’ The Ahmedabad ITAT quashed reassessment proceedings initiated against an HUF after finding that the Assessing Officer ignored the assessee’s detailed reply and documentary evidences filed in response to notice under Section 148A(b), and mechanically proceeded on borrowed information from the Insight Portal without independent application of mind. The assessee had originally filed return declaring income of about ₹10.92 lakh, wh...
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

‘Make Available’ Test Not Met, No TDS on US Software Contractor Payments: ITAT Bangalore Section 54 Exemption Available for Every House Sold: Bengaluru ITAT Books Can’t Be Rejected Solely for Non-Audit; 8% Profit Estimate Quashed Apartment Owners’ Association Not Taxable at Maximum Marginal Rate: ITAT Bangalore ITAT Bangalore Allowed Section 80P Deduction on Interest from Scheduled & Co-op Banks 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Your email address will not be published.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