← 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

Yardi Software India Private Limited, Pune vs. Assessing Officer, Jurisdiction Circle 12, Pune, Income Tax Department

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

ITA 549/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.549/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Yardi Software India Private Vs. Acit, Circle-12, Pune. Limited, Second Floor, Sigma House, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune City, Pune, Shivaji Housing Society S.O.- 411016. Pan : Aaccr8107N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Miss Chaitee LondheFor Respondent: Shri Milind Debaje
Section 14Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

parte order passed by Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) & remand the matter back to him to decide the appeal a fresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. 5. Learned DR appearing from the side of the revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm

Vijay Motilal Bhansali, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle 8, Pune

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

ITA 1465/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir JainFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the respondent-assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay

Poladpur Taluka Prathamik Shikshak Sahkari Patphedhi Maryadit Poladpur Shik, Poladpur, Raigad vs. ITO, Ward 2, Panvel

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

ITA 1457/PUN/2025[2016 - 17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the respondent-assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay

Technosmart Facility Management Services Private Limited, Pune vs. ITO 7 (5), Pune

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

ITA 1366/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 68

ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall in the course of set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering the submissions/evidences filed by the assessee shall pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250

Shri Vasupujya Swami Maharaj Temple Trust, Pune vs. ITO (Exemption) Ward 1(2), Pune

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

ITA 1288/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

deleted. We therefore set aside the order of CIT(Appeals) and remand this issue for fresh consideration by the AO, after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 13. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.” 21. In light

Shri Ishwarlal Gulabchand Vardhamantap Ayambil Trust, Pune vs. ITO Ward 7(1), Pune

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

ITA 1287/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

deleted. We therefore set aside the order of CIT(Appeals) and remand this issue for fresh consideration by the AO, after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 13. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.” 21. In light

Shivaji Sopan Gote, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Pune

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

ITA 1264/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A VazeFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(3)Section 250

ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is at liberty to adduce all the required submissions/evidences

Confederation for Convergence in Rural Development, Akola vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2806/PUN/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nrupbahaddur &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

pass a fresh speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the appellant trust in the course of opportunity of being heard. Appellant is at liberty to adduce all the required supporting documents/evidence substantiating the charitable activities. 6. In the result, the appeal filed ... accordance with law. Needless to mention that the appellant trust in the course of the set aside proceedings shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard and will remain at liberty to submit any further documents or explanations as may be required. 10. In the result, both the appeals

Confederation for Convergence in Rural Development, Akola vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2805/PUN/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nrupbahaddur &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

pass a fresh speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the appellant trust in the course of opportunity of being heard. Appellant is at liberty to adduce all the required supporting documents/evidence substantiating the charitable activities. 6. In the result, the appeal filed ... accordance with law. Needless to mention that the appellant trust in the course of the set aside proceedings shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard and will remain at liberty to submit any further documents or explanations as may be required. 10. In the result, both the appeals

Kailas Regency Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 12(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 817/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 817/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Kailas Regency Private Limited,.……………Appellant 2, Ashutosh Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan:Aacck2122Q] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-12(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri B.C. Jain, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(2)

Bench that the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) passed the ex-parte order without going into merit of the case and giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. Therefore, ld. Counsel pleaded to set aside the order passed by the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals). 5. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative ... natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of 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

Kaushalya Suppliers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 618/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 618/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Kaushalya Suppliers Private Limited,.………Appellant Room No. 5, Vinayak Complex, 4Th Floor, 55/1A, Strand Road, Kolkata-700006 [Pan:Aadck5565C] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 40

natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of 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

Jaswant Singh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 29(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 310/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 310/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaswant Singh,……………………………………Appellant 32/1A, Chakraberia Road South, Bhowanipore, Kolkata-700025, W.B. [Pan:Adnps0407P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-29(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan (Dakshin), 2, Gariahat Road, Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri L.N. Dash, Addl. Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R

documents filed by the assessee by way of paper book before the Tribunal and pass an appropriate order after providing 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. Assessing

Tirat Pachwai Shop, Tirat vs. ITO Ward-1(3)/Asansol, Aaykar Bhawan

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

ITA 167/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.167/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Tirat Pachwai Shop Vs Ito, Ward-1(3), Asansol Po : Kalipahari, West Bengal-713339 Pan No. : Aadft 4483 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Amit Agarwal, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Sr.DR

revenue. 3. It was submitted by the ld.AR that the assessee the assessment has been framed by the ld. AO without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard. In the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) there was a delay of 1396 days in filing the appeal. The assessee ... this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh on merits after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. CIT(A) positively. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly

Himansu Sekhar Senapati, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-22(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 122/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.122/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S Himansu Sekhar Senapati Vs Ito, Ward 22(4), Kolkata 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, 4Th 24, Ns Road, 5Th Floor, Kolkata- Floor, Kolkata-700016, West Bengal 700001, West Bengal Pan No. :Alpps 7769 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Pallash Chattopadhyay, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 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), Nfac Delhi Dated 19.09.2024 Passed For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. At The Outset, On Perusal Of The Appeal Record, I Find That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Filed Belatedly By 46 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Delay In Filing The Appeal Due To Lack Of Knowledge In Passing Of The Order By The Ld. Cit(A), Which Caused The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal Within The Stipulated Period. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Objection To Condone The Delay. Considering The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & The Contentions Made By The Assessee In The Affidavit, I Condone The Delay Of 46 Days In Filing The Present Appeal & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Admitted For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Pallash Chattopadhyay, ARFor Respondent: Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr.DR
Section 250

mentioned the address in form 35 to send notice for hearing u/s 250 and passed an order on that date without giving further opportunity of being heard..” 4. The above grounds have been raised by the assessee in Form 36 filed before the Tribunal. A bare perusal of ground No.3 ... fact that the notice has been served to his old email ID and passed an order on that date without giving further opportunity of being heard. 3 5. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee reiterated

Elect Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1060/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1060/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Elect Agencies Private Limited Vs Ito,Ward-10(1), Kolkata 142, Gowala Bagan, Ashabari Apartment, Kolkata-700048 Pan No. : Aacce 6797 P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar : Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Sr.Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, AR

issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for adjudicating afresh on merits after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. AO positively. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly

Evergreen Fincap Market Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 272/KOL/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 272/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Evergreen Fincap Market Private Limited,.…Appellant Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan:Aabce2789A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-5(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

before the Bench that the ld. CIT(Appeals) passed the ex-parte order without going into merit of the case and giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. Therefore, ld. Counsel pleaded to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative ... principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of 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

Radha Singh, Patna vs. ACIT, Circle - 37, Kolkata

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

ITA 2650/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2650/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Radha Singh,………………………………………Appellant Bihari Kunj, Makhania Kuan, Patna-800004, Bihar [Pan:Ayaps0975Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..Respondent Circle-37, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 26, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 22, 2025 O R D E R

Section 143(2)

natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of 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

Corona Steel Industry Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 2531/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY (Vice President)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri susanta Saha, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(ii)

file of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose off the above issue of the assessee on merits after providing sufficient 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

ACIT, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. K K Group of Company Pvt. Ltd., Sikkim

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2247/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Kk Group Of Company Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Singtam Bazar, East Sikkim, 5Th Floor, 110, Shantipally, Vs. Singtam Forest Block, Singtam, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal S.O. 737134, Sikkim (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadck8867D Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Somnath Das Biswas, DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 263Section 69C

with a direction to Assessing Officer to make necessary examination on the issue and pass fresh assessment order after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. During the fresh assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to submit the relevant details and documents in respect of the aforesaid

Senthil Kumar Thangavelu, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 916/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Navneeth N. Kini, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 90

Bench of Tribunal has condoned the delay of 136 days and directed the ld. AO to consider the claim of FTC after granting opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the present assessee, we find that part of the delay was on account of COVID period and part