← 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

Kamadev Behera, Khurda vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assesee is dismissed

ITA 97/CTK/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.97/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Kamadev Behera Vs Pcit-1, Bhubaneswar At:- Narendrapur, P.O:- Nirakarpur, Khurda, 752019 Pan No. : Axxpb 9473 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.R.Biswal, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pcit, Bhubaneswar-1, Passed U/S. 263 Of The Act Dated 24.03.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That All The Details Have Been Produced Before The Ld.Cit(A) & The Ao & That The Details Have Been Provided Before The Ld.Pcit. It Was Submission That The Ld. Pcit Has Not Set Aside The Assessment Order And, Therefore, Order U/S.263 Of The Act Is Liable To Be Quashed. It Was Submission That The Assessee Is Only A Dealer In Banana & The Transactions Are All By Cheque. It Was Submission That In The Original Assessment Order, The Ao Had Estimated The Income Of The Assessee At 8%, But The Ld. Pcit Has Asked The Ao To Examine The Sources Of The Cash Deposits, Which Has Remained Unverified & To Apply The Provisions Of Section 69A & 115Bbe Of The Act. It Was Submission

For Appellant: Shri N.R.Biswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 263Section 69A

order for the limited purpose and for that purpose remitted the issues back to the AO to decide the matter after giving adequate opportunity of being heard. Admittedly, the ld. PCIT has not set aside the assessment order, he has directed the AO to modify the assessment order in respect

Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt Ltd, Belpahar vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 455/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.429, 430, 431, 454 & 455/Ctk/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Ay : 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015) Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt. Ltd, Vs Income Tax Officer (Tds), Main Road, Po: Belpahar, Sambalpur R.S., Jharsuguda-768218 Pan No. : Aadca 6930 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr/ Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 31.05.2023, 20.05.2025, 24.09.2020 & 27.09.2023 For The Assessment Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015. 2. At The Outset, Ld.Ar We Find That Appeals Of The Assesee In Ita No.429/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2015-2016 Is Delayed By 737 Days. Ita No.430/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2016-2017 Is Delayed By 06 Days. Ita No.431/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 249 Days. Ita No.454/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2014-2015 Is Delayed By 639 Days & Ita No.455/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 639 Days. In This Regard, The Assesee Has Filed Condonation Application In Each Of The Above Files Supported By Affidavits Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay In Filing The Above Appeals. Ld. Cit-Dr/Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Serious

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR/

admitted for hearing. 3. Ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assesse without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assesee. It was also the submissions of the ld. AR that the assesee could not provide the details during the course ... justice, the issues in all these appeals are restored to the file of the ld.AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) in ITA Nos.429, 430, 431, 454/CTK/2025 and Rs.25,000/-(Rupees

Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt Ltd, Belpahar vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur

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

ITA 454/CTK/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.429, 430, 431, 454 & 455/Ctk/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष /Ay : 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015) Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt. Ltd, Vs Income Tax Officer (Tds), Main Road, Po: Belpahar, R.S., Jharsuguda-768218 Sambalpur Pan No.: Aadca 6930 F (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr/ Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 31.05.2023, 20.05.2025, 24.09.2020 & 27.09.2023 For The

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR/

admitted for hearing. 3. Ld. AR submitted that the Id. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assesse without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assesee. It was also the submissions of the Id. AR that the assesee could not provide the details during the course ... justice, the issues in all these appeals are restored to the file of the Id.AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) in ITA Nos.429, 430, 431, 454/CTK/2025 and Rs.25,000/-(Rupees

Gurukula Foundation, Khurda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 432/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.432/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Gurukula Foundation Vs Ito, Exemption Ward, At:- Chhatabara, P.O/P.S:- Bhubaneswar Jamujhari, Khurda 752054 Pan No. : Aabtg 1538 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Order Dated 13/03/2025 Passed In Appeal No. Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-3/10155/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. At The Outset, It Is Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 68 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay, Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Ld.Cit-Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, The Delay Of 68 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Admitted For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR

justice, 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. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the ld. AO in the readjudication proceedings, positively. 3 6. In the result, appeal of assessee

Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt Ltd, Belpahar vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Sambalpur

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 431/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.429, 430, 431, 454 & 455/Ctk/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Ay : 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015) Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt. Ltd, Vs Income Tax Officer (Tds), Main Road, Po: Belpahar, Sambalpur R.S., Jharsuguda-768218 Pan No. : Aadca 6930 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr/ Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 31.05.2023, 20.05.2025, 24.09.2020 & 27.09.2023 For The Assessment Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015. 2. At The Outset, Ld.Ar We Find That Appeals Of The Assesee In Ita No.429/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2015-2016 Is Delayed By 737 Days. Ita No.430/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2016-2017 Is Delayed By 06 Days. Ita No.431/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 249 Days. Ita No.454/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2014-2015 Is Delayed By 639 Days & Ita No.455/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 639 Days. In This Regard, The Assesee Has Filed Condonation Application In Each Of The Above Files Supported By Affidavits Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay In Filing The Above Appeals. Ld. Cit-Dr/Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Serious

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR/

admitted for hearing. 3. Ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assesse without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assesee. It was also the submissions of the ld. AR that the assesee could not provide the details during the course ... justice, the issues in all these appeals are restored to the file of the ld.AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) in ITA Nos.429, 430, 431, 454/CTK/2025 and Rs.25,000/-(Rupees

Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt Ltd, Belpahar vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Sambalpur

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 430/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.429, 430, 431, 454 & 455/Ctk/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Ay : 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015) Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt. Ltd, Vs Income Tax Officer (Tds), Main Road, Po: Belpahar, Sambalpur R.S., Jharsuguda-768218 Pan No. : Aadca 6930 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr/ Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 31.05.2023, 20.05.2025, 24.09.2020 & 27.09.2023 For The Assessment Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015. 2. At The Outset, Ld.Ar We Find That Appeals Of The Assesee In Ita No.429/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2015-2016 Is Delayed By 737 Days. Ita No.430/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2016-2017 Is Delayed By 06 Days. Ita No.431/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 249 Days. Ita No.454/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2014-2015 Is Delayed By 639 Days & Ita No.455/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 639 Days. In This Regard, The Assesee Has Filed Condonation Application In Each Of The Above Files Supported By Affidavits Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay In Filing The Above Appeals. Ld. Cit-Dr/Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Serious

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR/

admitted for hearing. 3. Ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assesse without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assesee. It was also the submissions of the ld. AR that the assesee could not provide the details during the course ... justice, the issues in all these appeals are restored to the file of the ld.AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) in ITA Nos.429, 430, 431, 454/CTK/2025 and Rs.25,000/-(Rupees

Ashok Bricks Industries Private Limited, Belpahar vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Sambalpur

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 429/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.429, 430, 431, 454 & 455/Ctk/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Ay : 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015) Ashok Bricks Industries Pvt. Ltd, Vs Income Tax Officer (Tds), Main Road, Po: Belpahar, Sambalpur R.S., Jharsuguda-768218 Pan No. : Aadca 6930 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr/ Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 31.05.2023, 20.05.2025, 24.09.2020 & 27.09.2023 For The Assessment Years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2014-2015. 2. At The Outset, Ld.Ar We Find That Appeals Of The Assesee In Ita No.429/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2015-2016 Is Delayed By 737 Days. Ita No.430/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2016-2017 Is Delayed By 06 Days. Ita No.431/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 249 Days. Ita No.454/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2014-2015 Is Delayed By 639 Days & Ita No.455/Ctk/2025 For A.Y.2017-2018 Is Delayed By 639 Days. In This Regard, The Assesee Has Filed Condonation Application In Each Of The Above Files Supported By Affidavits Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay In Filing The Above Appeals. Ld. Cit-Dr/Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Serious

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR/

admitted for hearing. 3. Ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assesse without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assesee. It was also the submissions of the ld. AR that the assesee could not provide the details during the course ... justice, the issues in all these appeals are restored to the file of the ld.AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) in ITA Nos.429, 430, 431, 454/CTK/2025 and Rs.25,000/-(Rupees

Suresh Kumar Pati, Jajpur vs. ITO, Jajpur, Jajpur Road

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

ITA 423/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No. 423/Ctk/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Suresh Kumar Pati Vs Ito, Jajpur C/O:- Ashok Sharma Pati, Plot No:- 1654,At:- Basudebapur, P.O:- Jahanpur, Devidwar, Jajpur, 755007 Pan No. : Alwpp 3032 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : None राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A),National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 21/12/2023 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10856/2019-20 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At The Time Of Hearing The Ld. Ar Was Asked What His Qualification Were & He Has Submitted That He Is Only A Final Year Student Of Ca, As He Is Not Entitled Into Appear As An Authorized Representative Under The Provisions Of Section 288 Of The Income Tax Act His Submission Are Not Being Taken On Record & His Presence Is Not Being Taken On Record For This Proceedings. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Sr. Dr That The Assessment Orders As Also The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A) Were Exparte Orders. It Was Fairly Agreed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 288

interest of justice the issues of this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 4. In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court

Arun Kumar Sahoo, Cuttack vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

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

ITA 400/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.400/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Arun Kumar Sahoo, Vs Ito Ward-1(1), Cuttack Mundamuhan, Kanheipada, Bramhanigaon, Barang, Cuttack-754005 Pan No. : Cbvps 3652 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 08.05.2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. At The Outset, Ld.Ar Submitted That Due To Inevitable Circumstances The Assessee Could Not Provide The Details During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings. It Was Submitted That The Matter May Be Restored To The File Of Ld. Ao So That The Assessee Could Be Able To Produce All The Relevant Facts In Support Of His Claim Before The Ld. Ao 3. Ld Sr Dr Submitted That Proper Opportunities Were Allowed & The Assessee Could Not Produce The Documents As Required By Both The Authorities Below. If The Matter Is Restored To The File Of Ld. Ao, A Cost May Be Imposed On The Assessee For His Non-Compliant Before Both The Authorities Below.

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

justice, 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, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) payable by the assesee to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Bbg Metal Syndicate Pvt. Ltd, Cuttack vs. DCIT Circle-1, Cuttack

In the result, we are of the view that no inference called for in the order of the CIT(A) and consequently we dismissed the same

ITA 361/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.361/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-2021) Bbg Metal Syndicate Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Circle-1(1),Cuttack Badambadi, Behind Traffic Tower, Cuttack, 753009 Pan No. : Aaecb 4011 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri K. K Bal, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 28.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Returned Filed By The Assessee Came To Be Processed & Intimation Came To Be Issued U/S. 143(1) Of The Act. The Assessee Had Filed Rectification Application & The Cpc Had Rejected The Rejection Application. It Was Submission That It Was Not A Effective Rejection But Was In Fact Reprocessing Of The Intimation U/S. 143(1) Of The Act. It Was Submission That On Appeal The Ld.Cit(A) Had Observed The Page 3 Of His Order That The Issue Were Purely Factual & Required Verification Of The Claim At The End Of The Ao & At Consequently, Directed The Ao To Verify The Claim Made By The Appellant & Passed A Speaking Order U/S. 154 Of The Act Giving An Opportunity Of Being Heard

For Appellant: Shri K. K Bal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(3)

directed the AO to verify the claim made by the Appellant and passed a speaking order u/s. 154 of the Act giving an opportunity of being heard 2 u/s. 154(3) of the Act to the appellant. It was submission that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in giving such directions ... Ld.CIT(A) directing the AO to pass an order u/s.154 of the Act after verifying the facts and after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard is very much in order. It must be mentioned here that the 154 application to be disposed of by the AO is mentioned

Pahanawa Associates Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 360/CTK/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No. 360/Ctk/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) Pahanawa Associates Priivate Vs Ito, Bhubaneswar Limited, Flat No-606,Vishnu Block,Balaji Complex Housing Society, Jharpada,Bhubaneswar-751006 Pan No. : Aaecp 8304 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : None राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 27/02/2025 In Appeal No.Nfac/2013-14/10072355 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. There Is A Delay Of 49 Days, For Which The Assesee Has Filed Condonation Of Delay Petition. The Revenue Has Not Disputed The Delay & Condonation. The Reasons Given By The Assesee Are Found To Be Plausible, Consequently, The Delay In Filing Of The Appeal Is Condoned. 3. A Perusal Of The Facts As Also The Submissions Of The Ld. Sr. Dr Shows That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Exparte In Sofaras The Assesee Has Not Represented Before The Ld.Cit(A). This Being So, In The Interest Of The Justice The Issues In This Appeal Are Restored To The File Of The Ld.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R

issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Ld. 2 CIT(A) for readjudication after granting the assesee adequate opportunity of being heard. 4. In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 24/09/2025

Samarbaga Service Cooperative Society Limited, Jharsuguda vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Jharsuguda

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

ITA 314/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No. 145/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Samarbaga Service Cooperative Vs Ito Ward-1, Jharsuguda Society Limited, Samarbaga, Jhirapali, Rengali, Sunari, Jharsuguda-768219 Pan No. : Aafas 5189 N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 25.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. At The Outset, Ld.Ar Submitted That Due To Inevitable Circumstances The Assessee Could Not Provide The Details During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings. It Was Submitted That The Matter May Be Restored To The File Of Ld. Ao So That The Assessee Could Be Able To Produce All The Relevant Facts In Support Of His Claim Before The Ld. Ao 3. Ld Sr Dr Submitted That Proper Opportunities Were Allowed & The Assessee Could Not Produce The Documents As Required By Both The Authorities Below. If The Matter Is Restored To The File Of Ld. Ao, A Cost May Be Imposed On The Assessee For His Non-Compliant Before Both The Authorities Below.

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

justice, 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, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) payable by the assesee to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Motilal Agarwal, Sambalpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sambalpur

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

ITA 170/CTK/2025[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2025AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.170/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 1998-1999) Motilal Agarwal, Vs Ito, Ward-1(1), Sambalpur Badabazar, Sambalpur768004 Pan No. : Abrpa 6815 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mark Wright, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Mark Wright, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154

prayer that the Assessing Officer may be directed to reconsider the application u/s.154 of the Act after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 4. In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the roder of the ld.AO and ld.CIT(A). 5. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal ... issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld. AO for readjudication of the rectification application after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court