“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

Shaikh Najeeb Shaikh Abdul Hameed, Jalna vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 664/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.664/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Yea: 2018-19 Shaikh Najeeb Shaikh Abudul V The Income Tax Officer, Hameed, S Ward-2, Ahmednagar. Naaz Press, Dukhi Nagarm, Street No.2, Old Jalna-431203. Maharashtra. Pan: Eipps2336E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 69A

circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC has erred not granting an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC ... without discussing each and every ground and merits of the case and merely dismissed for non-compliance. Hence, ld.AR requested for one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Submission of ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) : 3. The ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer

Casp Council for Arts and Social Practice, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption) Pune, Pune

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

ITA 411/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj C Chag (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar

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

Exemption), erred in rejection of application for final registration in Form 10AB and cancellation of provisional registration without providing proper, complete, reasonable opportunity of being heard while considering application made for final registration made in Form 10AB dated 23.09.2022 which is against principal of natural justice and due to this ... incomplete opportunity of being heard, hearing notices could not be read resulting in rejection of application for final registration in Form 10AB and cancellation of provisional registration. 5. Appellant crave leave to add, alter, amend any grounds of appeal. 7. Similar grounds have been raised in ITA No.411/PUN/2025 which read

Casp Council for Arts and Social Practice, Navi Mumbai vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 410/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj C Chag (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar

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

Woman Development Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 385/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir JainFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the same afresh after on merits affording one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. The Ld. DR conceded to the above proposition of the Ld. AR. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused ... afresh and decide the matter on merits, in accordance with facts and law after allowing one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee and present its case. The assessee shall provide the requisite support in terms of submitting the relevant details/documentary evidence as may be required/ called upon

Yashotej Foundation, Pune vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

ITA 377/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.377 & 376/Pun/2025 Yashotej Foundation, Sr. No. 60, H. No. 604/4, Kondhwa (Bc), Pune-411048 Vs. Pan: Aabcy3688C अपीलार्थी / Appellant Cit (Exemption), Pune प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Department By : Date Of Hearing : Date Of Pronouncement : Shri Vishal Ravindra Patil Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari 16-04-2025 29-04-2025 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Two Separate Order(S) Both Dated 13.12.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“Cit(E)"] Whereby He Rejected The Application Of The Assessee Filed On 15.06.2024 Before Him In Form No. 10Ab U/S 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & Section 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The "Act"). For The Sake Of Convenience Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

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

grounds of appeal :- 1. The CIT [Exemption) erred in law and facts by rejecting the application and cancelling provisional registration without affording adequate opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice. 2. The CIT (Exemption) erred in ignoring the adjournment request dated 04/12/2024 and proceeding to reject the application ... failure to comply by the due date i.e. 05.12.2024. However, the assessee neither submitted explanation to the show cause notice nor availed the opportunity of being heard. Since, the assessee did not furnish any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it, the Ld. CIT(E) presumed that the assessee

Yashotej Foundation, Pune vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

ITA 376/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.377 & 376/Pun/2025 Yashotej Foundation, Sr. No. 60, H. No. 604/4, Kondhwa (Bc), Pune-411048 Vs. Cit (Exemption), Pune Pan: Aabcy3688C अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vishal Ravindra Patil Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date Of Hearing : 16-04-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2025 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Two Separate Order(S) Both Dated 13.12.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [“Cit(E)"] Whereby He Rejected The Application Of The Assessee Filed On 15.06.2024 Before Him In Form No. 10Ab U/S 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & Section 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The "Act"). For The Sake Of Convenience Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Ravindra PatilFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

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

grounds of appeal :- *1. The CIT [Exemption) erred in law and facts by rejecting the application and cancelling provisional registration without affording adequate opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice. 2. The CIT (Exemption) erred in ignoring the adjournment request dated 04/12/2024 and proceeding to reject the application ... failure to comply by the due date i.e. 05.12.2024. However, the assessee neither submitted explanation to the show cause notice nor availed the opportunity of being heard. Since, the assessee did not furnish any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it, the Ld. CIT(E) presumed that the assessee

Nashik Surgical Society, Nashik vs. CIT(E), Pune

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

ITA 2523/PUN/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandranashik Surgical Society The Cit (Exemption), Pinnacle Endoscopy & Diagnostic Pune Centre, Dattaraj Appt, Near Vs. Ahirrao Photo Studio, College, Nashik – 422005, Maharashtra Pan: Aabtn6522F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket M Joshi Department By : Shri Ravi Prakash Date Of Hearing : 28-04-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Prakash

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

directly relevant to the present proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above, including an opportunity of being heard. 6. Thus, the assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (ii) of second ... matter may please be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the same on merits after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3] The assessee submits that it has made due compliance in the 12AB proceedings and it has been granted final

Maheshwari Pragati Mandal, Nanded vs. C.I.T, Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 2514/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2514/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: - Maheshwari Pragarti Mandal, V The Commissioner Of Maheshwari Bhavan, H.No.10- S Income Tax(Exemption), 2-1091, New Koutha, Latur Pune. Road, Nanded – 431603. Maharashtra. Pan: Aabtm9529M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sarvesh Vinod – Ar Revenue By Shri P R Mane – Dr Date Of Hearing 23/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax-Exemption, Pune Passed Under Section 12A(1)(Ac) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 27.09.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal : “1) Deeming Rental Income Be Of Commercial Nature The Ld Cit Has Erred In Assuming That Income Reported By The Appellant

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

directly relevant to the present proceedings. However the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above including an opportunity of being heard. 8. In view of the above, the undersigned is not satisfied about the charitable nature and the genuineness of activities of the assessee

Sanvira Foundation, Hyderabad vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

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

ITA 186/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Mrs. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 80G

this issue back to the file of learned CIT(E) with a direction to re-decide the issue afresh, after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal

Myk Charitable Foundation, Hyderabad vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

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

ITA 185/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Mrs. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 80G

file 5 ITA.No.185/Hyd./2025 of learned CIT(E) with a direction to re-decide the issue afresh, after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee

Sujatha Kancharla, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 6(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1233/HYD/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri Pawan KumarFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69A

aside proceedings while considering the assessee’s claim for deduction of the subject expenditure afford a 30 Sujatha Kancharla, Hyderabad. reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ground of appeal No.4 is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations. 25. Apropos the disallowance ... Holdings India Pvt. Ltd (supra). Needless to say, the A.O. shall in the course of the set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and shall remain at liberty to carry out any further verification, as he may deem fit. 28. Apropos the disallowance

Amrit Breeder Farms Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2472/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)

aside and the assessment order of the Ld. AO is remanded to him to be done de novo after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to raise all legal issues before the Ld. AO who shall decide the issue of service

Sima Dhara, Kismat Apurbapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhawan, Chinsurah

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1225/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1225/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sima Dhara………………………...……………………………..….……….Appellant Kismat Apurbapur, Natun Bazar, Singur, Hooghly, W.B. – 712409. [Pan: Admpd1772F] Vs. Ito, Chinsurah……….....……..............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Susanta Kr. Mukherjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Lovish Shelly, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 29, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 22.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Running A Petrol Pump Under The Proprietorship Concern Of M/S Freedom Fighter Service Station. The Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.34,09,050/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass Followed By Notices Issued U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. The Assessment Was Completed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 15.10.2019 By

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 68Section 69A

fairly submitted that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the decisions of the Assessing Officer as well ... direct the Assessing Officer to reexamine the entire issue afresh after considering the documentary evidences already filed by the assessee and provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue in accordance with law by passing speaking order. I.T.A. No.1225/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sima Dhara

Srinivasan Raj, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncc-3(2), Coimbatore

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

ITA 2415/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69A

comply with his notices. Any non-compliance shall be adversely viewed. The Ld. AO on his part would offer sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. To this extent the order of lower authorities is set aside and the ground of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Dr . Kiran Patel Education Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption Ward 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 949/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(c)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250

substantial justice, we are inclined to allow the claim of the Assessee, however, subject to verification by the AO and by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. Thus, the AO is accordingly directed to allow the claim of the Assessee, by verifying the claim

Trans Ocean Agency, J.B. Nagar Andheri(West) vs. Income Tax Officer, 33(1)(1), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhavan

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

ITA 1297/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Prateek JainFor Respondent: 16.04.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 68

circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the id. CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order, without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the Id. CIT (A) erred

Mumbai Railway Vikas Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. C.I.T (E), Mumbai

ITA 3227/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sanyogita Nagpal

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 617

erred in framing the revision order u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] by not giving proper, sufficient and effective opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. 1.2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the revision order

International Air Transport Association, Mumbai (for Sending Notices) vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) - Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3330/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3330/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2020-21) International Air V/S. Dcit (It), Circle 2(2)(1), Transport Association बिधम Mumbai C/O Ernst & Young Llp Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Air India Building, Senapati Bapat Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Dadar (West), Mumbai, Maharashtra-400021 Maharashtra-400028 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacci4695N Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka and Shri DiveshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar

fees received from providing ICH services made in its hands would stand vacated. Needless to say, the assessee shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard during the course of the 'set aside' proceedings and shall remain at a liberty to substantiate its aforesaid claim on the basis

Manoj Narandas Bha vs. Ar, Bhayandar West Thanevs.Income Tax Officer, Thane West

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

ITA 2644/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Manoj Narandas Bhavsar, Ito, A-405, Mahavir Jyot, Station Road, Room No. 16, B Wing, 6Th Floor, Bhayandar West, Vs. Ashar It Park, Road No. 16Z, Maharashtra-401101. Midc, Thane West-401101. Pan No. Aczpb 2228 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Rahul Hakani Revenue By : Mr. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Mr. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Mr. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69C

amounting to Rs. 23,26,688/-, but apparently no show cause was issued to the assessee providing for opportunity of being heard as why the addition u/s 69C of the Act might not be made for not explaining source of expenditure incurred for procuring of those goods from grey market ... appropriate to setaside the order of ld CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing officer for providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee and explain the source of expenditure for procuring goods form grey market for supplying to sales parties corresponding

Yuvarajsinh Harishchandrasinh Zala, Surendranagar vs. ITO Ward-1, Surendranagar

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

ITA 56/RJT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Ms. Preyashi Tetad, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter ... back to the file of Assessing Officer for Yuvarajsinh Harishchandrasinh Zala de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside