Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Manoj Arjun Nasta Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Manoj Arjun Nasta Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) NRI Not Aware of Notices: Mumbai ITAT Restores Reassessment & Deletes Penalties u/s 271(1)(b) & 271(1)(c) Tribunal heard three connected appeals, one relating to the quantum reassessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 &  two arising from penalties u/s 271(1)(b) & 271(1)(c). AO had made an addition of ₹62,00,000/- treating investment in an immovable property as unexplained. Assessee submitted that he had been an NRI for several decades, permanently employed abroad, earning only foreign income, &  therefore was not filing returns in India. Cons...
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Your email address will not be published.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