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

M/S. Ashok Griha Udyog Kendra Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 5, Kanpur

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

ITA 402/LKW/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Ashok Griha Udyog Kendra V. Acit-5 Private Limited Kanpur 51/92, Shree Bhagwati Tower Naya Ganj, Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aabca1684N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Jagdish, Advocate Respondent By: Shri C. K. Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 16 05 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16 05 2019 O R D E R Per A. D. Jain, V.P.: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Kanpur Dated 23/3/2018 For Assessment Year 2013-14, Taking The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. Because On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.7,30,696/- Made As Expenditure Incurred In Relation To Income Not Includible In Total Income Of Appellant By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Read With Rule 8D Of The I. T. Rules 1962, Even Though These Provisions Are Not Applicable In The Case Of Appellant. 2. Because On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition! Disallowance Of Rs.9,18,359/- Being 1/10Th Of Rs.91,83,586/- Debited Under Head Other Expenses In The Profit & Loss Account, Made By The Assessing Officer On Ad Hoc Basis By Treating It As Non Business

For Appellant: Shri Jagdish, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C. K. Singh, D.R

Section 14ASection 40A

…discussing in detail, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. 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…

M/S. Smart Services, Kanpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Kanpur

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

ITA 354/LKW/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow23 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Smart Services V. Acit-3 62-A/5, Kalyanpur Kalan Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Acafs7120D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swarn Singh, Fca Respondent By: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 23 04 2019

For Appellant: Shri Swarn Singh, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 69

…discussing in detail, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. 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 ITA No.354/LKW/2018 Page 3 of 3 (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 affo…

Mahoba Urban Cooperative Bank Limited, Kanpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 5, Kanpur

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

ITA 33/LKW/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow23 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Prakhar Gupta, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.32 & 33/LKW/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Mahoba Urban Cooperative Bank v. ACIT-5 Limited Kanpur Subhash Chawki Mahoba TAN/PAN:AAAJM1205F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mahoba Urban Cooperative Bank v. ACIT-5 Limited Kanpur Subhash Chawki Mahoba TAN/PAN:AAAJM1205F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Prakhar Gupta, FCA Respondent by: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R. Date of hearing: 23 04 2019 Date of pronouncement: 23 04 2019 O R D E R P…

Mahoba Urban Cooperative Bank Limited, Kanpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 5, Kanpur

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

ITA 32/LKW/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow23 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Prakhar Gupta, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R

Mahoba Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd., Mahoba vs. Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kanpur

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

ITA 788/LKW/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow23 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Prakhar Gupta, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Alka Singh, D.R

Shri Shantilal Jain, Jabalpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 180/JAB/2018[2013-14(26Q, 4th Qtr.)]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur04 Apr 2019

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2013-14 Shanti Lal Jain V. Dcit Prop. Jain Advertising Agency Cpc, Tds Arya Samaj Market Ghaziabad Russel Chowk, Jabalpur Tan/Pan:Jbpso6909A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Advocate Respondent By: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 04 04 2019 O R D E R Per A. D. Jain, V.P.: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jabalpur, Dated 27/6/2018 For Assessment Year 2013-14, Taking The Following Grounds: 1. On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit (A) Has Erred In Passing The Order Ex-Parte On 26/6/2018 While The Counsel'S Junior Had Filed The Application For Adjournment On 21/6/2018 For Extension Of Hearing For Further 20 Days But He Passed The Order On 26/6/2018 In Undue Haste. 2. That The Id. A.O. (Tds-Cpc) Had Wrongly Levied A Late Fees Of Rs.16,800/-And Issued Order U/S 200A Of The Act. 3. That The Id. A.O. Has Charged The Late Fee Of Rs.16,800/- Without Sanction Of Law As Subsection (3) Of The Section 234E Of The Act States It Shall Be Paid Before Delivering A Tds Statement. It Means That Any Late Fees Should Have Been Deposited Just At

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R

Section 156Section 190Section 200ASection 204Section 234ESection 285

…en a specific ground with regard to non-service of notice on 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 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 of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt,…

Shubh Associates Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Jabalpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 179/JAB/2018[2013-14 (26Q, 3rd Qtr.)]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur04 Apr 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R

Section 156Section 190Section 200ASection 204Section 234ESection 285

…discussing in detail, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment orders. 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 incumbent on the ld CIT(A) to decide an appeal on merit even in the absence of any representation before him. 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 of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt,…

Shubh Associates Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Jabalpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 178/JAB/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur04 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R

Section 156Section 190Section 200ASection 204Section 234ESection 285

Shri Sandeep Kumar Barman, Katni vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Katni, Katni

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

ITA 156/JAB/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur03 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2008-09 Sandeep Kumar Barman V. Income Tax Officer Shivaji Nagar, Gali No.18 Ward Katni Katni Tan/Pan:Aptpb7891N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri L. L. Sharma, Advocate Respondent By: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03 04 2019 O R D E R Per A. D. Jain, V.P.: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Jabalpur, Dated 19/2/2016 For Assessment Year 2010-11, Taking The Following Grounds: 1. Considering The Fact That The Id Cit(A) Has Passed The Appeal Order Without Considering The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee & Further Id Cit(A) Has Not Decided Grounds Of Appeal On Merit Hence In View Of Hon'Ble Itat Jabalpur Bench Jabalpur Decision In The Case Of M/S Shriji Ware House V Ito (Ita No 38/Jab/2015) The Order Of Id Cit(A) Is Bad In Law & May Kindly Be Cancelled. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Id Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Passing Ex-Party Appeal Order. Without Prejudice To Above 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Id Cit(A) Should Have Held That The Id Ito Ward 2, Katni

For Appellant: Shri L. L. Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R

…discussing in detail, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. 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 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 ITA No.156/JAB/2018 Page 3 of 3 affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the…

Shri Santosh Kumar Shinghai, Sagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Sagar, Sagar

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

ITA 149/JAB/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur03 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2009-10 Santosh Kumar Singhal V. Acit 1/108, Galla Mandi Road Circle Sagar Sagar Tan/Pan:Akdps2994J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Gupta, C.A. Respondent By: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03 04 2019

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year:2009-10 Santosh Kumar Singhal v. ACIT 1/108, Galla Mandi Road Circle Sagar Sagar TAN/PAN:AKDPS2994J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Vijay Gupta, C.A. Respondent by: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date of hearing: 02 04 2019 Date of pronouncement: 03 04 2019 O R D E R PER A. D. JAIN, V.P.: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Jabalpur, dated 28/5/2018 for Assessment Year 2009-10, taking the following grounds: 1. Considering…

Allahabad Bank Karmchari Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Kanpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Kanpur

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

ITA 264/LKW/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.D Jain

Section 147Section 80P

…discussing in detail, his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order. 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 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 of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt,…

Dr. Gyanendra Goel Foundation, Mathura vs. CIT Exmp., Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 173/AGR/2017[-]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Mar 2018

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajarshi Dwivedi, CIT DR

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…reasonable opportunity of hearing and the impugned order has been passed on the same day on which the case was fixed for hearing, which is in direct conflict with the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of “S. Velu Palandar Vs DCIT”, (1972) 83 ITR 683 (Mad). 4. On the other hand, ld. DR has placed strong reliance on the order under appeal. 5. We have heard the parties and perused the material on record. At the outset, it is seen that registration u/s 12AA(1)(b)(i) of the I.T. Act was granted to the appellant Institution vide order dated 05.04.2016 (APB, 16-18). It is not disputed that this r…

Sh. Ram Krishan Adarsh Sewa Samiti, Mathura vs. C.I.T., (Exemptions), Lucknow

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 23/AGR/2016[-]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Sept 2017

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 80G(5)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 23 /AGR/2016 N.A. (Shri) Ram Krishan Adarsh CIT(Exemption) Sewa Samiti, A-29, Teacher’s Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Colony, Maholi Road, Lucknow Mathura. PAN AAEAS 4361 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by: Shri Anurag Sinha, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT DR Date of hearing: 14/09/2017 Date of Pronouncement: 26/09/2017 ORDER PER, DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, AM: 1. This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT(Exemptions), dated 10.12.20…

Ashish Singhal, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 6025/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Ms Suchitra Kamble, Jm Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ashish Singhal, Vs. Ito, C/O Advocate Lalit Kumar Sharma, Ward-20(4), F-223A, Ground Floor, New Delhi. Mangal Bazar, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. Pan: Bjyps8042N Assessee By : Shri Lalit Kumar Sharma, Advocate Deptt. By : Shri K.K. Jaiswal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Kumar Sharma

…essment order was also passed on the same day, we are of the considered opinion that the assessment order is suffering due to violation of principles of natural justice. Our view is fortified by the judgment in the case of S. Velu Palandar VS. Dy CTO (1972) 83 ITR 683 (Mad) in which it has been held that the order passed ex parte on date fixed for hearing is not valid. In our considered opinion, the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the 3 matter is restored to the file of AO. We order accordingly and direct the AO to decide the disputed issue afresh as per law, afte…