Loading ITAT cases…
65 orders · Page 2 of 2
The Tribunal held that reopening assessments based on third-party statements without providing an opportunity for cross-examination violates the principles of natural justice. Therefore, additions made on such basis are unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that reopening assessments based on third-party statements without providing an opportunity for cross-examination violates the principles of natural justice. Therefore, additions made on such basis are unsustainable.
The Tribunal found that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice and was an erroneous approach. The case was not decided on merits.
The Tribunal found that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
The Tribunal found that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was erroneous and not in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
The Tribunal found that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice and that the assessee's case was not decided on merits. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.
The Tribunal found the ex-parte order to be erroneous and not in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
The Tribunal held that reopening based on third-party statements without allowing cross-examination violates natural justice. Therefore, additions made on such basis are unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that reopening based on third-party statements without allowing cross-examination violates natural justice. Therefore, additions made on such basis are unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that reopening based on third-party statements without allowing cross-examination violates natural justice. Therefore, additions made on such basis are unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that the assessees failed to provide plausible reasons for the significant delay and did not submit original affidavits or supporting evidence. Therefore, the delay could not be condoned.
The Tribunal found that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice and was an erroneous approach. The case was not decided on merits.
The Tribunal held that the assessees failed to provide plausible reasons for the significant delay and did not submit original affidavits or supporting evidence. Therefore, the delay could not be condoned.
The Tribunal held that the assessees failed to provide plausible reasons for the significant delay and did not submit original affidavits or supporting evidence. Therefore, the delay could not be condoned.
The Tribunal found that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice and was an erroneous approach. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.