Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Vijay Prakash Ghosalkar Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Vijay Prakash Ghosalkar Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

Once overall source is accepted, Section 69A cannot be invoked merely due to lack of one-to-one correlation- ITAT Mumbai deletes adhoc addition on cash deposits

Assessee, an individual lady, did not file her return of income originally for AY 2017-18. On receiving AIR information that she had earned interest income, made cash deposits of ₹42.50 lakh in HDFC Bank, purchased time deposits & mutual funds of ₹30 lakh, AO reopened the case u/s 148. In response, Assessee filed a return declaring ₹9,22,640 inc

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

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

Section 151A Breach: ITAT Quashes Reopening, ₹58.68 Cr Bogus Purchase Addition Deleted Full 80P Deduction Upheld as Nominal Members Counted as ‘Members’ Under State Law ITAT Delhi Allows Section 54 Exemption for Property Purchased in Australia Net Agricultural Income Accepted After Tribunal Revises Expense Claim Penalty u/s 271AAC & 270A Remanded as Quantum Appeal Restored for Fresh Hearing 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Sponsored
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
November 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930