Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Devanshi Sharma Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download. Already Upgraded? Login here to access.
Devanshi Sharma Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) The assessee challenged reopening proceedings relating to alleged bogus LTCG exemption u/s 10(38) from sale of shares, where the AO treated sale proceeds as fictitious and made additions after reopening u/s 147. The primary issue before ITAT was jurisdictional validity of the reassessment initiated through order u/s 148A(d) and notice u/s 148. The Tribunal observed that both the order u/s 148A(d) and notice u/s 148 were issued after expiry of three years from the end of AY 2017-18. As per sec. 151(ii), sanction in such cases must be obtained from PCCIT/CCIT...
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.

2 Comments

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Your email address will not be published.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