Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Khajamohiaddin Ghousemohiaddin Syed Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2013-14
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Khajamohiaddin Ghousemohiaddin Syed Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Second Bite at the Same Cherry Not Allowed— Reopening on Same Issue is Pure Change of Opinion Reassessment Quashed Assessee engaged in civil construction filed revised return declaring income of Rs.40,01,190/-. Original assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144 dated 28/03/2016 determined income at Rs.1,33,63,668/- by applying presumptive rate of 8% u/s 44AD on gross receipts of Rs.16,70,45,850/-, after rejecting the books due to absence of supporting evidence for expenses. This original addition was already the subject matter of appeal pending...
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Your email address will not be published.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