Loading ITAT cases…
65 orders · Page 2 of 2
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer at Sri Ganganagar lacked jurisdiction to frame the assessment as the assessee resided and conducted transactions in Punjab. Consequently, the assessment order was quashed for want of jurisdiction.
The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice (Audi Alteram Partem) were not followed as it was unclear if proper notices were served and the assessee was given a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The circular mandates withdrawal or not pressing of appeals where the tax effect is less than Rs. 20 lakhs.
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) did not provide a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessees, violating the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal noted that it was unclear if notices from the CIT(A) were served and that principles of natural justice require an opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the cases were set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The tribunal found that the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to be heard, were not complied with as it was unclear if proper notices were served. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside.
The Tribunal found that the principles of natural justice, specifically 'Audi Alteram Partem', were not followed as it was unclear if proper notices were served. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside.
The Tribunal noted that it was unclear if notices from the CIT(A) were served and that principles of natural justice require an opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the cases were set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Department was not maintainable as it was covered by the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which stipulated a monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs for filing appeals before the ITAT. The circular also indicated that pending appeals below this limit should be withdrawn or not pressed.
The Tribunal held that the appeals filed by the Revenue were not maintainable as they were covered by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, which stipulated a monetary limit of Rs. 20 lakhs for filing appeals before the ITAT. The circular was also applicable retrospectively to pending appeals.
The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice were violated as the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.
The Tribunal held that the Department's appeal was not maintainable as it was filed against the prevailing CBDT circular regarding monetary limits for appeals. The assessee's cross-objection was not pressed.