← All Phrases

“opportunity of being heard”

Natural JusticeAudi Alteram PartemAudi Alteram Partem22,508 judgments

The decision most relied on for opportunity of being heard is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), cited in 2,267 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on opportunity of being heard

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court
1,656
citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India
54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court
702
citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

Tin Box Company v. CIT
249 ITR 216 · 2001 · Supreme Court
624
citing judgments

When an issue is remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, the AO must conduct a de novo examination and provide the assessee a full opportunity of being heard. The assessee is bound to comply with the notices issued by the AO.

CIT v. Vikas Polymers
341 ITR 537 · 2012 · High Court
318
citing judgments

An assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial under Section 263 merely because the Assessing Officer did not record an enquiry and its satisfactory answer in the assessment order, provided such an enquiry was conducted. For revision under Section 263, the Commissioner must also provide the assessee an opportunity of being heard and examine their explanation.

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar
1 SCC 591 · 1985 · Reported
225
citing judgments

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

ITO v. M. Pirai Choodi
334 ITR 262 · 2011 · Supreme Court
211
citing judgments

If an assessee was denied an adequate opportunity of being heard, including the right to cross-examine a witness, the assessment should be set aside and restored for fresh adjudication after affording due opportunity, even if the assessee failed to appear at an appellate stage. The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, should ensure such matters are re-adjudicated.

Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT
119 ITR 996 · 1979 · Supreme Court
205
citing judgments

An assessment cannot be reopened under Section 147/148 based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer on material already considered during the original assessment, clarifying the scope of 'escaped assessment'.

Judgments citing opportunity of being heard

Syed Mohammed Asad Ullah Hussaini, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 268/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.268/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Syed Mohammed Asad Vs. Acit, Ullah Hussaini, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Abfph0148G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, Dated 14.09.2023, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, ”Ao”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 28.03.2022, For The Assessment Year 2016- 17. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(Appeals) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

assessee did not appear or file any material. In these circumstances, the assessee cannot now complain of the denial of an opportunity of being heard to him by the authorities below. 12 Syed Mohammed Asad Ullah Hussaini vs ACIT 21. Having examined both the legal and factual issues, we hold

Narayan Das Damani, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 44(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2185/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2185/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Narayan Das Damani.……….…………………....…………………....Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kol-69.. [Pan: Agxpd4817F] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(1), Kolkata..……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pampa Ray, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 01, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 03, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 25.07.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Runs Proprietary Concern M/S Oriental Industries As Dealer Of Wires & Cables. During The Year Ended 31.03.2019 The Appellant Submitted Return Of Income Showing Total Income 368070 Which Was Accepted Under Sec 143(1) Vide Order Dated 21.02.20. A Return Was Also Filed On 06.09.23 & The Assessing Authority Had Information That M/S Aerocom Trade Exim Was Found Indulging In Issuance Of Fraudulent Gst Bills The Appellant Has

Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to examine the whole issue afresh I.T.A. No.2185/Kol/2025 Narayan Das Damani after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to strictly comply to the notices issued in the remand proceedings. 7. In the result

Nirmala Sheth, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, two appeals of the Smt

ITA 525/CTK/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.523 & 525/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010--11) Nirmala Sheth, Prop. Sheth Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Bhagwan Das Vittal Das & Sons, Cuttack Near Bank Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack-753002 Pan No. : Aglps 2909 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.490,491,492 & 506/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09,2009-10, 2010—11 & 2012-13) Amal Sheth, C/O. Sheth Bhagwan Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Das Vittal Das & Sons, Near Bank Cuttack Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack- 753002 Pan No. : Agcps 2147 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ld Cit Dr & Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 2 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, ld CIT DR and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR

Nirmala Sheth, the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate in the assessment proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to draw adverse inference. 7. As the income

Nirmala Sheth, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, two appeals of the Smt

ITA 523/CTK/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.523 & 525/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010--11) Nirmala Sheth, Prop. Sheth Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Bhagwan Das Vittal Das & Sons, Cuttack Near Bank Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack-753002 Pan No. : Aglps 2909 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.490,491,492 & 506/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09,2009-10, 2010—11 & 2012-13) Amal Sheth, C/O. Sheth Bhagwan Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Das Vittal Das & Sons, Near Bank Cuttack Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack- 753002 Pan No. : Agcps 2147 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ld Cit Dr & Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 2 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, ld CIT DR and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR

Nirmala Sheth, the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate in the assessment proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to draw adverse inference. 7. As the income

Amal Sheth, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, two appeals of the Smt

ITA 506/CTK/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.523 & 525/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010--11) Nirmala Sheth, Prop. Sheth Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Bhagwan Das Vittal Das & Sons, Cuttack Near Bank Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack-753002 Pan No. : Aglps 2909 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.490,491,492 & 506/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09,2009-10, 2010—11 & 2012-13) Amal Sheth, C/O. Sheth Bhagwan Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Das Vittal Das & Sons, Near Bank Cuttack Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack- 753002 Pan No. : Agcps 2147 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ld Cit Dr & Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 2 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, ld CIT DR and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR

Nirmala Sheth, the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate in the assessment proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to draw adverse inference. 7. As the income

Amal Sheth, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, two appeals of the Smt

ITA 492/CTK/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.523 & 525/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010--11) Nirmala Sheth, Prop. Sheth Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Bhagwan Das Vittal Das & Sons, Cuttack Near Bank Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack-753002 Pan No. : Aglps 2909 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.490,491,492 & 506/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09,2009-10, 2010—11 & 2012-13) Amal Sheth, C/O. Sheth Bhagwan Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Das Vittal Das & Sons, Near Bank Cuttack Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack- 753002 Pan No. : Agcps 2147 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ld Cit Dr & Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 2 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, ld CIT DR and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR

Nirmala Sheth, the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate in the assessment proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to draw adverse inference. 7. As the income

Amal Sheth, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, two appeals of the Smt

ITA 491/CTK/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.523 & 525/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010--11) Nirmala Sheth, Prop. Sheth Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Bhagwan Das Vittal Das & Sons, Cuttack Near Bank Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack-753002 Pan No. : Aglps 2909 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.490,491,492 & 506/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09,2009-10, 2010—11 & 2012-13) Amal Sheth, C/O. Sheth Bhagwan Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Das Vittal Das & Sons, Near Bank Cuttack Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack- 753002 Pan No. : Agcps 2147 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ld Cit Dr & Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 2 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, ld CIT DR and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR

Nirmala Sheth, the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate in the assessment proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to draw adverse inference. 7. As the income

Amal Sheth, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, two appeals of the Smt

ITA 490/CTK/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.523 & 525/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010--11) Nirmala Sheth, Prop. Sheth Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Bhagwan Das Vittal Das & Sons, Cuttack Near Bank Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack-753002 Pan No. : Aglps 2909 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.490,491,492 & 506/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09,2009-10, 2010—11 & 2012-13) Amal Sheth, C/O. Sheth Bhagwan Vs Acit, Circle-2(1), Das Vittal Das & Sons, Near Bank Cuttack Of India, Nayasarak, Cuttack- 753002 Pan No. : Agcps 2147 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Adv राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, Ld Cit Dr & Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 2 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborthy, ld CIT DR and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR

Nirmala Sheth, the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate in the assessment proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to draw adverse inference. 7. As the income

Trijal Enterprise Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 263/CTK/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.261, 262 & 263/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Trijal Enterprise Private Limited Vs Acit, Central Circle-2, At-Hall No.6, Block-2, Bmc Bhubaneswar Bhawani Mall, Saheed Nagar, Khordha-751007, Bhubaneswar Pan No. :Aafct 9662 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2, All Dated 25.03.2025 For The Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Confirming The Penalty Levy Under 270A Of The Act. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That For The Impugned Assessment Years The Assessee Has Filed Original Return For The Assessment Year 2017- 18 Disclosing A Loss Of Rs.8,30,930/-, For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Income Of Rs.20,46,140/- & For Assessment Year 2019-20 An Income Of Rs.17,27,850/-. There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 03/04/2019. In Response To Notice Issued U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Disclosing A Loss

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 153ASection 270ASection 271A

order imposing a penalty under this Chapter shall he made unless the assessee has been heard, or has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard". To comply with this requirement the notice u/s 274 should be clear enough to convey the assessee about the charge which ... should not be visited by penalty (30% of the undisclosed income. Against this charge the assessee should have been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. From going through the above three notices issued to the assessee on 22.03.2016, 03.06.2016 and 16.09.2016, we find that there is no mention about

Trijal Enterprise Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 262/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.261, 262 & 263/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Trijal Enterprise Private Limited Vs Acit, Central Circle-2, At-Hall No.6, Block-2, Bmc Bhubaneswar Bhawani Mall, Saheed Nagar, Khordha-751007, Bhubaneswar Pan No. :Aafct 9662 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2, All Dated 25.03.2025 For The Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Confirming The Penalty Levy Under 270A Of The Act. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That For The Impugned Assessment Years The Assessee Has Filed Original Return For The Assessment Year 2017- 18 Disclosing A Loss Of Rs.8,30,930/-, For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Income Of Rs.20,46,140/- & For Assessment Year 2019-20 An Income Of Rs.17,27,850/-. There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 03/04/2019. In Response To Notice Issued U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Disclosing A Loss

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 153ASection 270ASection 271A

order imposing a penalty under this Chapter shall he made unless the assessee has been heard, or has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard". To comply with this requirement the notice u/s 274 should be clear enough to convey the assessee about the charge which ... should not be visited by penalty (30% of the undisclosed income. Against this charge the assessee should have been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. From going through the above three notices issued to the assessee on 22.03.2016, 03.06.2016 and 16.09.2016, we find that there is no mention about

Trijal Enterprise Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 261/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.261, 262 & 263/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Trijal Enterprise Private Limited Vs Acit, Central Circle-2, At-Hall No.6, Block-2, Bmc Bhubaneswar Bhawani Mall, Saheed Nagar, Khordha-751007, Bhubaneswar Pan No. :Aafct 9662 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2, All Dated 25.03.2025 For The Assessment Years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Confirming The Penalty Levy Under 270A Of The Act. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That For The Impugned Assessment Years The Assessee Has Filed Original Return For The Assessment Year 2017- 18 Disclosing A Loss Of Rs.8,30,930/-, For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Income Of Rs.20,46,140/- & For Assessment Year 2019-20 An Income Of Rs.17,27,850/-. There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 03/04/2019. In Response To Notice Issued U/S.153A Of The Act, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Disclosing A Loss

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 153ASection 270ASection 271A

order imposing a penalty under this Chapter shall he made unless the assessee has been heard, or has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard". To comply with this requirement the notice u/s 274 should be clear enough to convey the assessee about the charge which ... should not be visited by penalty (30% of the undisclosed income. Against this charge the assessee should have been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. From going through the above three notices issued to the assessee on 22.03.2016, 03.06.2016 and 16.09.2016, we find that there is no mention about