Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Jitendrakumar Dahyalal Parmar Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2011-12
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Jitendrakumar Dahyalal Parmar Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad) Reopening Based on Identical “Bogus Sub-Contractor” Reasons Quashed; 44AD Income Cannot Be Re-Disallowed: ITAT Ahmedabad Summary: The Ahmedabad Bench (SMC) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowed the assessee’s appeal for AY 2011-12 and quashed the reassessment proceedings under section 147, holding that the reasons recorded for reopening were mechanical, identical, and without independent application of mind. The reassessment was initiated based on a search in the DRA Group, alleging that payments made to the assessee as ...
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Your email address will not be published.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