RAM SAJJAN SHUKLA,REWA vs. ITO-KATNI, KATNI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer. The AO was directed to pass a de novo order after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to be heard, as both parties agreed on the need for further verification.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a civil contractor, appealed against an assessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B, which was subsequently dismissed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that both the assessment and appellate orders were passed without providing a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
What were the issues?
The key legal issue was whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity to be heard during the assessment and first appellate proceedings, leading to a request for remand for de novo consideration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH ‘SMC’, JABALPUR
Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
(A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.105/JAB/2024 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2018-19 against impugned appellate order dated 20/03/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1062987680(1) of National Faceless Appeal Centre [“NFAC” for short].
(B) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm which derives income as a Civil Contractor. The Assessing Officer (‘AO', for short) passed order dated 23.04.2021 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”). The assessee carried the matter in appeal before learned CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order Assessment Year: 2018-19 2
dated 20.03.2024, the assessee’s appeal
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S South INDIA Trading Company vs. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026