How many judgments cite Velu Palandar v. DCIT?

94 judgments on BharatTax cite Velu Palandar v. DCIT (83 ITR 683), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Velu Palandar v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 142(1), Section 153C, Section 156, Section 271(1)(b), Section 272A(1)(d), Section 12AA.

Velu Palandar v. DCIT

83 ITR 683High Court1972#1205 most cited

What is Velu Palandar v. DCIT authority for?

The opportunity of hearing provided to an assessee must be real, effective, and realistic, not merely notional, and tax authorities are incumbent to decide cases on their merits after affording due opportunity.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

S. Velu Palandar v. DCIT · 83 ITR 683 · opportunity of hearing · natural justice · real effective realistic opportunity · notional opportunity · section 142(1) · section 271(1)(b) · section 272A(1)(d) · penalty for non-compliance · ex-parte assessment · decide on merits

Also reported as

175 ITD 622

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 153C Section 156 Section 271(1)(b)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 12AA Section 12AB Section 80G

Issues it is cited on

section 110 section 272a section 272a(1)(d)section 271(1)(b)section 156 ex-parte assessment section 271 reasonable cause section 271(1)section 153c section 142 incriminating material

Judgments citing Velu Palandar v. DCIT

Shri Narendra Singh, Lucknow vs. ITO-1(2), Lucknow

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 228/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2011-12 Narendra Singh V. The Ito 1(2) C-170, Nirala Nagar Lucknow Lucknow Tan/Pan:Bjpps7004B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 13 06 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 06 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Kumar YadavFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 144

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld. CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 7. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, Page 5 of 5 on affording due and adeq…

M/S. Maria Exports International, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Kanpur

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 425/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Maria Exports International V. The Dy. Cit 88/569, Chamanganj Circle 3 Kasnpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aalfm9340E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Pradeep Seth, Fca Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03 03 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 07 03 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Seth, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld. CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunit…

Khairabad Eye Hospital Society, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Kanpur

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeals are treated as allowed

ITA 351/LKW/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Seth, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

…l, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment orders. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld. CIT(A) to decide an appeals on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportuni…

Khairabad Eye Hospital Society, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Kanpur

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeals are treated as allowed

ITA 350/LKW/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Seth, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Khairabad Eye Hospital Society, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Kanpur

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeals are treated as allowed

ITA 349/LKW/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Seth, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Khairabad Eye Hospital Society, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-I, Kanpur

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeals are treated as allowed

ITA 348/LKW/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Seth, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Kalyan Ji Mishra, Mirzapur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1), Mirzapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 39/ALLD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad19 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2009-10 Kalyan Ji Mishra, V. Income Tax Officer Range, Suriyawan, Mirzapur Civil Lines Road, Mirzapur Pan-Ahxpm48158 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Praveen Godbole, Ca Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.01.2022

For Appellant: Mr. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 27(1)(C)Section 27(1)(c)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…greeing with the assessment order. In this 2 Asstt. Year-2009-10 view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the Ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is true [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’. 175 ITD 622 (Dell) and incumbent on the ld. CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. in view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A0 to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunit…

Kalyanji Mishra, Varanasi vs. ITO, Range - III(1), Varanasi

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 103/VNS/2019[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi18 Nov 2021AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Kalyanji Mishra V. The Ito Bharhuhana Civil Lines Road Range Iii(1) Sadar, Varanasi Varanasi Tan/Pan:Axhpm4815B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11 11 2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 22 11 2021 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Varanasi, Dated 14.9.2018, For Assessment Years 2009- 10. 2. By Virtue Of The Impugned Order, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Assessee’S Appeal For Non-Prosecution, Observing That The Assessee Is Not Interested In Prosecuting The Appeal. The Ld. Cit(A) Had Issued Three Notices, Dated 7.4.2017, 20.8.2018 & 30.8.2018, Fixing The Dates Of Hearing On 25.4.2017, 27.8.2018 & Respectively & Passed The Order On 13.9.2018, Dismissing The Appeal Qua The Assessee. But, It Is Not Clear From His Order Whether Notice Of Hearing Was Ever Served Upon The Assessee. Such Service Of Notices Has, However, Been Disputed By The Assessee. 3. Heard. I Find That The Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Without Providing Proper Opportunity To The Assessee. Moreover, He Has Not Decided The Appeal After Discussing In Detail, His Reasons For Agreeing With The Assessment Order. In This View Of The Matter, Another Opportunity Of Hearing Requires To Be Given To

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R

…ith the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to ITA No.73/VNS/2018Page 2 of 2 the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld. CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunit…

Tanisha Agarwal, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-4(5), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 609/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2015-16 Tanisha Agarwal V. Ito 7, Shastri Nagar Range 4(5) Lucknow Lucknow Tan/Pan:Avfpa0559A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06 10 2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 10 2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 250Section 69A

…he appeal on merit after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As such, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite ['S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT' 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and 'Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT', 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Amit Singh, Varanasi vs. ITO, Range - 3(1), Varanasi

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 4/VNS/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi11 Aug 2021AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Amit Singh V. The Ito S-52/82. Co-Operative Building Range 3(1) Mint House, Nadesar Varanasi Varanasi Tan/Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri O. P. Shukla, Advocate Respondent By: Smt Abha Kala Chanda, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10 08 2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 11 08 2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri O. P. Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt Abha Kala Chanda, CIT (DR)

Section 5

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 5. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Seema Srana, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-5(3), Lucknow

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 645/LKW/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2013-14 Seema Sarna V. Ito 18, Pushpanjali Enclave Range 5(3) River Bank Colony Lucknow Lucknow Tan/Pan:Angps4976E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 16 06 2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 17 06 2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

…on the assessee has not been Page 2 of 2 commented on. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 5. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Manoj Kumar Gupta, Singrauli(M.P.) vs. It Officer, Mirzapur

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 318/ALLD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2009-10 Manoj Kumar Gupta V. Income Tax Officer Bhagat Singh Colony Mirzapur Singrauli Tan/Pan:Aldpg6259 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 14 02 2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 02 2020

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234A

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 5. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, ITA No.318/ALLD/2017 Page 4 of 4 on af…

Sudama Devi L/H Lal Chand Yadav, Sonebhadra vs. CIT (Appeals), Allahabad

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 157/ALLD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2009-10 Sudama Devi V. Income Tax Officer L/H Of Late Lalchand Yadav Mirzapur Owie Colony, Anpara Sonebhadra Tan/Pan:Aaipy5242N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri S. K. Madhuk, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 12 02 2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 13 02 2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Madhuk, CIT (DR)

…he appeal on merit after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As such, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 5. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Smt. Sita Devi, Allahabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Range-1(4), Allahabad

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 182/ALLD/2017[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad11 Feb 2020AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 1998-99 Smt Sita Devi V. Income Tax Officer 892/1324, Matthiganj Range 1(4) Allahabad Allahabad Tan/Pan:Ahupd9538M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10 02 2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 11 02 2020

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 69

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. ITA No.182/ALLD/2017 Page 3 of 3 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on af…

M/S. Asha Madesia, Bahraich vs. Income Tax Officer- I, Bahraich

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 614/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Feb 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S Asha Medesia V. Income-Tax Officer-1 54, Hospital Chauraha Bahraich Bahraich Tan/Pan:Aaqfa3876J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 05 02 2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 06 02 2020 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Lucknow, Dated 30/7/2019 For Assessment Year 2016- 17, Taking The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(2)(ii)

…4 of 4 reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Smt. Archana Shukla, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer- 4(1), Lucknow

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 426/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2014-15 Smt Archana Shukla V. Ito 4(1) 5.358, Gomti Nagar Extension Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Dbbps3822R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms Shweta Mittal, Fca Respondent By: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 05 02 2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 05 02 2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms Shweta Mittal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R

Section 144

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Shri Chandra Shekhar Khosla, Lucknow vs. Deputy Commssioner of Income Tax-2, Lucknow

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 735/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2015-16 Chandra Shekhar Khosla V. Dy. Cit-2 25, Shahnajaf Road Lucknow Hazratganj, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Afbpk1352D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, Advocate Respondent By: Smt Alka Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28 01 2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 01 2020 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Lucknow, Dated 24/10/2019, For Assessment Year 2015-16, Taking The Following Grounds: 1. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer By Passing An Ex-Parte Order. 2. That No Proper Opportunity As Required By Law Has Been Provided To The Appellant Failing Which The Order Passed Is Void Ab Initio, Bad In Law & Deserves To Be Cancelled. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In Holding That The Appellant Had Not Attended The Appellate Proceedings Whereas, On The Date Fixed For Hearing, The Ld. C1T(A) Was Not Available In Office Because Of Which The Hearing Could Not Be Attended. 4. That Without Prejudice In Any Way Of The Matter, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Considered The Facts Duly Given In The Statement Of Facts Alongwith The Appeal & Is Not Ita No.735/Lkw/2019 Page 2 Of 3

For Appellant: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt Alka Singh, D.R

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 5. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Shri Vinod Kumar Pandey, Sultanpur vs. Income Tax Officer Sultanpur, Sultanpur

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 187/ALLD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Vinod Kumar Pandey V. Income Tax Officer 501, Jalsa Marriage Hall Sultanpur Inside Abc School Sutanpur Tan/Pan:Aqhpp6310K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Pushpendra Shukla, A.R. Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21 11 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 22 11 2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Pushpendra Shukla, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

…opportunity of hearing to the assessee. As such, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the ITA No.187/ALLD/2018 Page 2 of 2 assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Sheetalaya, Allahabad vs. DCIT, Allahabad

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 213/ALLD/2015[1988-89]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Nov 2019AY 1988-89

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 1988-89 Sheetalaya V. Dy. Cit 4, Katra Road Range I Allahabad Allahabad Tan/Pan: (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 21 11 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 22 11 2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

…he assessment order. In this view of ITA No.213/ALLD/2015 Page 2 of 2 the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…

Pinku Pandey, Allahabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Range-I(3), Allahabad

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 189/ALLD/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad15 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2005-06 Pinku Pandey V. Income Tax Officer 1(3) Village Bandhpur Allahabad Lal Gopal Ganj Allahabad Tan/Pan:Cgwpp9877N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri L. K. Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18 11 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19 11 2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri L. K. Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

…il, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. In this view of the matter, another opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the assessee to represent her case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.) and ‘Ms. Swati Pawa vs. Dy. CIT’, 175 ITD 622 (Del)] and incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before them. 4. In view of the above, the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity…