Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Amann Sadiq Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.

Amann Sadiq Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Assessee provided KYC services to One97 Communications Ltd. & filed his return for AY 2018–19 declaring receipts of ₹96,82,565, based on Form 26AS available at the time of filing. Later, Form 26AS was updated in Feb 2019, showing additional receipts of ₹16,18,485, representing invoices dated April & May 2018 pertaining to AY 2019–20.

AO added this difference as unreported receipts in AY 2018–19. CIT(A) confirmed the addition.

Before ITAT, Assessee showed that:

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

ITAT Bangalore Quashes U/s 143(3) Assessment for Want of U/s 153C Jurisdiction ITAT Bangalore Deletes Section 271D Penalty on Cash Sale Receipt ITAT Bangalore Deletes Section 271FAA Penalty for SFT Delay Second OGE Non-Est; Two U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 Orders for Same AY Invalid – Revenue Appeals Dismissed by ITAT Bangalore ITAT Chandigarh Allows Sec 80P(2)(d) Deduction – 31 Oct Due Date Applies Due to Statutory Audit 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
February 2026
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
232425262728