SMT. SHAKUNTLA CHOUDHARY,TONK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TONK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 145/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 November 2020AY 2014-151 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by confirming additions without affording the assessee a proper opportunity to be heard. This violated the principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2014-15. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) confirmed additions without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice by confirming additions without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not specified in the provided text

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 145/JP/2019

Hearing: 28/10/2020Pronounced: 09/11/2020

vkns'k@ ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 11/12/2018 for the A.Y. 2014-15.

Following grounds have been taken by the assessee:

1. Under The facts and circumstance of the case the learned CIT (Appeal) has grossly erred in law as well as in facts by confirming additions without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to appellant which is against the principal of natural justice. The action of learned CIT is

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →