“opportunity of being heard”

Bharat Benefication & Power Pvt. Ltd., Raigarh vs. Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bhopal

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 336/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

assessment denovo, as directed, leaving the other issues in the original assessment as such. The assessee is allowed to be afforded with reasonable opportunity of being heard in the set aside proceedings. Aggrieved with the aforesaid order u/s 263, the assessee preferred an appeal before this tribunal, which is under

Joseph Jose, Patna vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-4, Patna

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.197/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Joseph Jose……………………….....…..…………………....Appellant House Of Sudhir Kr. Singh, Opposite Loyala High School, P.O Sadaqat, Ashram Kurji Patna, Bihar-800010. [Pan: Ajlpj6722E] Vs. Dc/Ac, Cir-4, Patna……….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 24, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 07, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit, Appeal Addl/Jcit(A)-10, Delhi ["Cit(A)"] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Ate That The Assessee Is An Individual & Derived His Income From House Property, Business & Other Sources For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.16,51,470/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Through Cass Showing Reason For Abnormal Increase In Cash Deposits During Demonetization Period As Compared To Pre-Demonetisation Period. Therefore, The Assessing Officer Issued Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Asking For Various Details.

matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to decide the appeal on merits of the case. We direct the assessee to comply all notices during the remand

Kamlesh Kumar, Patna vs. ITO Ward- 6 (4), Patna

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraι.Τ.Α. No.: 147/Pat/2025

Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the order of the A.O. passed in the above case without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant is bad in law and against the principals of natural justice. 2. For that the order of learned C.I.T ... matter back to the Ld. AO for making the reassessment de novo. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Accordingly

Rajyeshwar Retail Trade Systems Pvt Ltd, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

In the result- Impugned order is set aside and Penalty of

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2015-16

Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the plea of the appellant that penalty levied u/s271(1)(b) for the A.Y. under consideration without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard is not sustainable and therefore, the claim of the appellant on these grounds are not acceptable. 4.1.3 In view of above discussions, I find ... case Ld. AO has erred in passing and Ld. CIT (A)-3, Bhopal has erred in confirming the impugned order without affording any opportunity of being heard against the principles of natural justice. 3. That the assessee craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any of the grounds