Vittal v. Appropriate Authority

221 ITR 760High Court1996#13768 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 144 Section 144B Section 147 Section 148 Section 148A(d)Section 151A Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 253(1)section 44ad section 250(6)unexplained money section 133a speaking order section 144b section 69a section 139 income from other sources opportunity of being heard section 144

Judgments citing Vittal v. Appropriate Authority

Javeed Khan Ahemad Khan, Yawal vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2738/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. Rathi (virtual)For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, Addl.CIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

…Panna Devi Saraogi [1970] 78 ITR 728 (Cal.). In Smt. Ritu Devi v. CIT [2004] 141 Taxman 559 (Mad.), time of just one day was given to the assessee to furnish reply. This was held as a denial of opportunity. As held in E. Vittal v. Appropriate Authority [1996] 221 ITR 760 (AP), where a decision is based upon a document in a proceeding, a copy of the same should be provided to the affected party. Otherwise, it would violate the principles of natural justice as the opportunity of being heard should be an effective opportunity and not an empty formality. Denial of opportunity may make an order void. Limitation of tim…

Brand India Real Estate Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…Article and that violation of the principles of natural justice by a State action is a violation of Article-14. That it has been held by Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in E. Vittal and another & Rajan B. Patel Vs. Appropriate Authority and Others (1996) 221 ITR 760 (AP) that where a Statutory Authority relies upon a document in a proceeding but denies a copy of the same to the affected party, he violates the principles of natural justice as the opportunity of being heard should be an effective opportunity but not an empty formality. That it is well settled that no evidence of document can be relied upon unl…

Prakash Arjun Desai, Raigad vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Panvel, Cirlce

Appeals of the assessee are PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 298/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: MR K Gopal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

…d same should not be empty formalities, it should not be a paper opportunity, the doctrine of natural justice is a facet of fair play in action and no person shall be saddled with a liability without being heard. In ‘E. Vittal v. Appropriate Authority’ [1996] 221 ITR 760 (AP), it is held that, where a decision is based upon a document in a proceeding, copy of the same should be provided to the affected party according reasonable period to negate, otherwise, it would violate the principles of natural justice as the opportunity of being heard should be an effective opportunity and not an empty formality, as the den…

Prakash Arjun Desai, Raigad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Panvel, Panvel

Appeals of the assessee are PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 297/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: MR K Gopal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

Prakash Arjun Desai, Raigad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Panvel, Panvel

Appeals of the assessee are PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 296/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: MR K Gopal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

Shrinivas Vijaykumar Chidrewar, Pune vs. ITO Ward 3(3), Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL

ITA 1470/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2014-2015 Shrinivas Vijaykumar Chidrewar A-38, S.No-55, H.No-1, Sadbhav Co-Op. Hsg. Society, Kothrud, Pune-411029 Pan: Ahspc3607Q. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Pune. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 147Section 250Section 69A

…78 ITR 728 (Cal.). In the case of ‘Smt. Ritu Devi v. CIT’ [2004] 141 Taxman 559 (Mad.), time of just few days was given to the assessee to furnish reply which was also held as denial of real opportunity. As held in ‘E. Vittal v. Appropriate Authority’ [1996] 221 ITR 760 (AP), where a decision is based upon a document in a proceeding, copy of the same should be provided to the affected party according reasonable period to negate, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 6 Shrinivas Vijaykumar Chidrewar Vs ITO ITA No. 1470/PUN/2024 AY: 2014-15 otherwise, it would violate the principles of natural justice as the opportunity of being h…

Sundar Sankar Va Swadhya Mandal, Nashik vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSE

ITA 1439/PUN/2023[--]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1439/Pun/2023 Sundar Sankar Va Swadhya Mandal, 22, Lokmanya Nagar, Gangapur Road, Nashik- 422002. Pan: Aaets1478G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mrs. Deepa Khare [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ajay Kumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

…Devi Saraogi’ [1970] 78 ITR 728 (Cal.). In ‘Smt. Ritu Devi v. CIT’ [2004] 141 Taxman 559 (Mad.), time of just a day was given to the assessee to furnish reply. This was held as denial of opportunity. As also held in ‘E. Vittal v. Appropriate Authority’ [1996] 221 ITR 760 (AP), where a decision is based upon a document in a proceeding, copy of the same should be provided to the affected party according reasonable period to negate, otherwise, it would violate the principles of natural justice as the opportunity of being heard should be an effective opportunity and not an empty formality, as the denial of reasonable…