Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Milind Amrut Patil Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download. Already Upgraded? Login here to access.
Milind Amrut Patil Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Claim of Acting as Mere “Conduit” through M-Pesa Rejected – ₹32.22 Lakh Cash Deposit Treated as Unexplained & Appeal Dismissed Assessee’s appeal before ITAT challenged the NFAC order dated 04-07-2025 confirming addition of ₹32,22,775/- u/s 69A as unexplained cash deposit. When the case was called, no one appeared for the Assessee, & the adjournment request received through email contained no valid reason. Tribunal held that adjournment is not a matter of right & found the request casual & dilatory, hence rejected it. On merits...
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

Defect in Section 143(2) Notice Format Is Curable Under Section 292B: ITAT Bangalore Cash Loan Enforceable Under NI Act Despite Section 269SS Breach: SC Kolkata ITAT Quashes Assessment as Section 143(2) Notice Was Without Jurisdiction BSNL VRS-2019 Ex-gratia Fully Exempt Under Section 10(10B): Surat ITAT Patna ITAT Deletes Search Additions Based on Retracted Statements & Estimates 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Your email address will not be published.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