“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

Sri Venkatacharya Vaidika Samsthan, Vishakhapatnam vs. ITO, Ward - 2(1), Vishakhapatnam

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 323/VIZ/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Nov 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.322 & 323/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2025-26) Sri Venkatacharya Vaidika Samsthan V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1)) 11-203, Sowmya Kuti, Prahladapuram 35, 50-92-35, Infinity Tower Visakhapatnam – 530027 Sankara Matam Road Opposite Reliance Fresh [Pan: Aaits2838J] Nearby Main Road, Madhura Nagar Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam 530016 (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

notices issued by the Id. CIT Exemptions was due to genuine reasons as explained above. I hereby state that given one more opportunity of being heard before the learned CIT Exemptions in the interest of justice, our Trust shall make due compliances to satisfy the learned CIT(E) regarding eligibility

Sri Venkatacharya Vaidika Samsthan, Visakhapatnam vs. ITO, Ward - 2(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 322/VIZ/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Nov 2025AY 2025-26

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

Murlidhar Lohia, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kanpur

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 418/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2018-19 Murlidhar Lohia V. The Income Tax Officer 106, Anand Palace Ward 1(3)(1) Allengaj, Kanpur (U.P) Kanpur Tan/Pan:Akbpl3586F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.04.2025, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 16.08.2018, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.5,42,050/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) After Issuing Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act, On The Basis Of The Information That The Assessee Had Received Cash Credit Of Rs.14,21,000/- During The Year Under Consideration. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Issued Statutory Notices To The Assessee, Requiring The Assessee To Furnish Details Of The Aforesaid Cash Credit With Documentary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

section 148A(b) of the Act. For clarity, the exact wording of the proviso to Section 148A(b) is reproduced hereunder: "provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, by serving upon him a notice to show cause within such time, as may be specified in the notice, being

Ram Ratan Singh Pal, Lucknow vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 387/LKW/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2020-21 Ram Ratan Singh Pal V. The Assessment Unit 5C/111, Girdhar Kunj Nfac Sector 5, Vrindavan Colony Telibagh, Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Ahqpp7018N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms. Gurneet Kaur, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.01.2024, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 15.01.2021, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.2,81,520/- Under The Head Income From Salary. The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & A Refund Of Rs.2,50,510/- Was Created. Subsequently, The Assessee Filed Revised Return Of Income Under Section 139(5) Of The Act On 25.02.2021, Declaring The Same Income Originally Returned, I.E., Rs.2,81,520/-. In The Revised Return Of Income, The Assessee Declared Income From Salary At Rs.2,81,520/- & Income From

For Appellant: Ms. Gurneet Kaur, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 270ASection 44A

circumstance of the case, the order of Assessment has been passed in absolute violation of the principles of Natural Justice, without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and therefore deserves to be declared a nullity. 9. The appellant craves for leave to add, modify, amend or delete any other ... being the business/professional income, which has been wrongly made by AO. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the AO has not allowed adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and has passed the impugned assessment order under section 144 read with section 144B of the Act, without bringing

All India Minorities Welfare Soceity, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Lucknow

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

ITA 386/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 All India Minorities V. The Income Tax Officer Welfare Society (Exemption) 4-A, La Palace, Shahnajaf Lucknow Road Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aacta4540P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms. Gurneet Kaur, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Gurneet Kaur, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 144Section 69A

circumstance of the case, the order of Assessment has been passed in absolute violation of the principles of Natural Justice, without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and therefore deserves to be declared a nullity. 8. The appellant craves for leave to add, modify, amend or delete any other ... interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the AO for deciding the same afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. She submitted that the assessee undertakes to produce all the relevant documents in support of its claim before

All India Women Conference, Kanpur vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 135/LKW/2025[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2025-2026

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2025-26 All India Women Conference V. The Cit(Exemption) 16/4, Mahila Park Lucknow Sarsaiya Ghat Kanpur (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aacta1200E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.12.2024, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Under Section 10(23C)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) [Cit(E)], Rejecting The Application Of The Assessee For Registration Under Section 10(23C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)

Section 10

direction to consider the applications of the assessee for registration under section 10(23C) of the Act after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ld. CIT(E) is directed to consider the assessee’s application under section

Varunendra Narayan Deekshit, Pune vs. CIT(A), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 988/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agiwal

Section 10Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(3)

erred in passing rectification order u/s 154 of the Act against the revised return filed by the assessee on 31.03.2021 without granting any opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. ADIT, CPC has erred ... deductor or the collector of its intention so to do and has allowed the assessee or the deductor or the collector a reasonable opportunity of being heard.” 8 12. From the perusal of above section 154(3) of the Act, we are of the considered opinion that the notice

Dnyanyogi Foundation Sangli, Sangli vs. CIT- Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 175/PUN/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 36ASection 80G

registration u/s 12A of ITA, 1961. 2. The learned CIT (Exemption), Pune; erred in law and on facts in not providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant, as provided u/s 12AB of the ITA, 1961; to submit the details / information. As such, the rejection order passed ... registration u/s 80G of ITA, 1961. 3. The learned CIT (Exemption), Pune; erred in law and on facts in not providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant, as provided u/s 80G of the ITA, 1961; to submit the details / information. As such, the rejection order passed

Dnyanyogi Foundation Sangli, Sangli vs. CIT-Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 174/PUN/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 36ASection 80G

Mohammad Naushad, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 32(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 900/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: the Tribunal has arisen. It has also been submitted by the assessee that the delay is neither deliberate nor intention but occurred due to circumstances beyond his control and prayed for condonation of delay. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR has also not objected to condone the delay. In view of the above and considering the contention of the assessee stated in the affidavit, the delay of 56 days in filing the present appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Tiwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 44A

therefore, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. AO, failing which

Benzmark Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2122/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2122/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Benzmark Credit Capital Pvt. Limited,…..…Appellant C/O. Kedia Agarwal & Associates, 41, B.B. Ganguly Street, Central Plaza, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700012 [Pan:Aabcb2842H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Pramod Himmatsinghka, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Addl. Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 144BSection 147

Benzmark Credit Capital Pvt. Limited matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Srg Trading Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1833/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1833/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Srg Trading Pvt. Limited,……………....……Appellant 1, Crooked Lane, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 319, Esplanade, Kolkata-700069 [Pan:Aagcs7943D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-3(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Miraz D. Shah, A.R. Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Cit (D.R.) & Shri S.B. Chakraborty, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)

principle of natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Gopal Krishan Maharwal, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 43(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1823/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1823/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Gopal Krishan Maharwal,…………………..…Appellant 3, Pratap Ghosh Lan, Burra Bazar, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aespm6895H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-43(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place West, Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Avijit Dey, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147

principle of natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At 3 Gopal Krishan Maharwal the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with

Ghanshyam Das Singhania, Raipur vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 4(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1781/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1781/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Ghanshyam Das Singhania,………..………..…Appellant Singhania Sadan, Main Road, Neor4 S.O. (Raipur), Tilda, Raipur-493114, Chhattisgarh [Pan:Ajkps0564L] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…..Respondent Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Dakshin, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Byepass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(1)

principle of natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Asha Agarwal L/H of Late Arun Agarwal, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T./ A.C.I.T. - 46, Kolkata

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

ITA 1770/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1770/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Asha Agarwal,……….……………..…………..…Appellant (Legal Heir Of Late Arun Agarwal), 2/8B, Sarat Bose Road, Classica Apartment, Flat No. 6B, Kolkata-700020, W.B. [Pan:Acepa2928D] -Vs.- Dcit/Acit-46, Kolkata,………………....…..Respondent 3, Government Place West, Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 144BSection 147

Manish Ray & Co., Siliguri vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Siliguri

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

ITA 1545/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY (Vice President)

For Appellant: Shri Sujit Basu & Ms. Paramita BasuFor Respondent: Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40

required to be restored to the file of the ld.AO to dispose off the case of the assessee on merits after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and I do so. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with

Bargoda Godar Gopal Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Tamluk vs. ITO, Ward 27(3), Haldia

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

ITA 1385/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1385/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Bargoda Godar Gopal Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited,………………………..…………..…Appellant Vill. Bargoda Godar, P.O. Tamluk, Purba Medinipur-721652, West Bengal [Pan:Aacab8639D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-27(3), Haldia, Dubey House, Basudebpur, Talpukur, Khanjan Chalk, Haldia, Midnapore East-721602, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Miraz D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 144

principle of natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Seikh Kamaluddin, Paschim Midnapur vs. ITO, Ward 38(2), Midnapur

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

ITA 1374/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1374/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Seikh Kamaluddin,………………….……...……Appellant Nekarbag Tatarpur, Chandrakona, Paschim Midnapure-721242, West Bengal [Pan:Btwpk5866J] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-38(2), Midnapur, Amaravati, 1St Floor, Keranitola, Raja N.L. Khan Road, Paschim Medinipur-721101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Promit Majumdar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Addl. Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143Section 144

natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. Addl

Sriyans Enterprises Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1298/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1298/Kol/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Sriyans Enterprises Limited, Vs Ito Ward-5(1), Kolkata 22, Brb Basu Road, 1St Floor, Room No.14, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aaics 4667 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Dugar, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 13.11.2024 Passed For Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Filed Belated By 136 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay. The Contents Of The Application Are As Under :- Before The Hon'Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench Ref: Appeal Petition Filed On: In The Matter Of : - An Application For Condonation Of The Delay In Filing The Memorandum Of Appeal Against The Appellate Order Dated 13-11- 2024 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2016-2017; & In The Matter Of The :- A Memorandum Of Appeal Filed Under The Income Tax Act, 1961; & In The Matter Of: -

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Dugar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

made and the mutual funds, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to 11 promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

M/S. Shakumbri Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 1251/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1251/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 M/S. Shakumbri Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.,..……Appellant 99/5/9A, Ballygunge Place, 1St Floor, Kolkata-700019, West Bengal [Pan:Aaecs4660F] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-1(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Dey, A.R. Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S.B. Chakraborty, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 21, 2025 O R D E R

Section 144

principle of natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before