← 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

Amar Kesharwani, Etawah vs. ITO Ward 2(2)(5), Etawah

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

ITA 379/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds

Gufranul Hassan, Aligarh vs. ITO Ward 2(3)(1) Jhansi, Jhansi

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

ITA 378/AGR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Gufranul Hassan, Vs. Ito, D-4, Afzal Apartment, Ward-2(3)(1), Sir Syed Nagar, Jhansi Aligharh, Up 202 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aalph1367A Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/02/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 80CSection 80G

this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds

Taruna Vatssa, Agra vs. Income Tax Officer, Agra

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

ITA 317/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

perusal of the case material available on record, we find that both the authorities below have passed the erroneous orders without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard and considering the documents filed by the assessee. Therefore, in the light of issuance of notices and service upon the assessee ... matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the matter in accordance with law after providing proper and due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to co-operate in the assessment proceeding. Hence, keeping in view the entire factual position into

Harnam Singh Gurjar, Datia vs. Income Tax Officer, Gwalior

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

ITA 292/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & And Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142Section 144Section 69A

case material available on record, we find that both the authorities below have passed the orders ex parte without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard and considering the documents filed by the assessee. Therefore, we deem it fit to send the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer ... decide the same in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to co-operate in the assessment proceeding. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is disposed of accordingly 4 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Maharaja Agrasen Sewa Sadan, Select City vs. ITO (Exemption), Ayakar Bahwan

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 63/AGR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Ramit Kochar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Maharaja Agrasen Sewa Vs. Ito (Exemption) Sadan, Mughal Road, Kamla Ayakar Bhawan Nagar, Agra Uttar Pradesh 282005 Pan No. Aaatm6506F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

F.No. 149/150/2015- TPL). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay. The assessee has stated that assessee be given one more opportunity of being heard on merits. 5. The Ld. DR vehemently relied upon the orders of the authorities below. The ld. DR has stated that no plausible ... matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merit in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate in the assessment proceedings. The order

Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Aligarh vs. ITO., Ward-4(2)(5), Mainpuri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 63/AGR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

Income Tax Act without considering the written submissions and supporting evidence uploaded on Income Tax Portal and also denied an opportunity of being heard as requested by the assessee and hence, natural justice has been denied. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

Kushal Prasad Sahu, Bilaspur vs. ACIT, Circle1(1), Bilaspur

ITA 15/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 14 & 15/Rpr/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 140ASection 144Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 27lSection 80C

eligible deductions available under the mandate of law. Kushal Prashad Sahu Vs ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur 9. Needless to say, reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be provided to the assessee in the set aside assessment proceedings and the assessee would be at liberty to furnish all the necessary

Kushal Prasad Sahu, Bilaspur vs. ACIT, Circle1(1), Bilaspur

ITA 14/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 14 & 15/Rpr/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 140ASection 144Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 27lSection 80C

eligible deductions available under the mandate of law. Kushal Prashad Sahu Vs ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur 9. Needless to say, reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be provided to the assessee in the set aside assessment proceedings and the assessee would be at liberty to furnish all the necessary

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bilaspur vs. Ms Mayura Saria Pvt. Ltd., Bilaspur

ITA 430/RPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 430/Rpr/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

additions under the settled position of law . It is further submitted that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee was not provided with adequate opportunity of being heard as the show cause notice proposing variations in the assessment was issued to the assessee on 28.03.2023, to respond on the same

Shankar Prasad, Nalanda vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.04/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shankar Prasad…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant S/O Yogendra Prasad, Vill-Asthawan, P.O – Asthawan, Biharsharif, Nalanda, Bihar-803107. [Pan: Avnpp3389B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Rastogi, Sr. Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit - Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 07, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 22.11.2024 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 & Did Not File His Return Of Income For The Relevant Assessment Year. The Assessing Officer Got Information That The Assessee Had Made Cash Withdrawals Of Rs.1,37,13,000/- From Current Account Maintained With Canara Bank During F.Y 2017-18 & The Assessee Did Not File Any Itr. Therefore, The Assessing Officer After Obtaining Approval From The Competent Authority Issued Notice U/S 147 R.W.S 148A Of The Act Through Email. In Response To The Notice, The Assessee Filed His Return After A

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 68

justice and fair play, remand back the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present his case and to pass a speaking order. We also direct the assessee to strictly comply with the notices

Ranjay Kumar Diwakar, Nawada vs. ITO, Ward-2(5), Bihar Sharif

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 227/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.227/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjay Kumar Diwakar.………………………………………..………….……Appellant M/S Nidhi Pharma, Purani Jail Road, Nawada, Bihar-805110. [Pan: Aoppd7881R] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(5), Bihar Sharif.……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit - Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 07, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 12.09.2023 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. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 79 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause & The Delay Was Not Intentional. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In The Case Of The Assessee, Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Was Issued For Calling The Assessee To Submit True & Correct Return Of Income In Respect Of Assessment Year 2017-18 And

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250

issue may be set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to reexamine the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. The ld. DR supported the decisions rendered by the authorities below. 7. We, after hearing both the parties ... justified to remand the whole issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer to re-examine the case after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Assessing Officer is directed to pass a fresh order after verifying the documents submitted by the assessee. The assessee

Kudale Agro Foods, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Circle-14, Pune

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

ITA 1619/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 197Section 201(1)Section 40

assessee as a result of such verification and modify the assessment order accordingly as per the fact and law, after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We direct and order accordingly. Thus, ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is partly allowed. 10. In the result

Metropolitan Commercial Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(2), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1943/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 14ASection 250

assessee. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard. 4 Metropolitan Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 4. With these remarks, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the court

Sri Balaji Tyres, Kangayam vs. ITO Ward 1(4), Tiruppur

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

ITA 2969/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2969/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Sri Balaji Tyres, Income Tax Officer, No.245, Coimbatore Road, Ward-1(4), Kangayam, Tiruppur. Tamil Nadu-638 701. [Pan: Abafs1418D] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Ms.Sharren, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Ms.Sharren, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 147Section 250

Counsel for assessee informed that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order dismissing assessee’s appeal without giving him adequate opportunity of being heard. The Ld. Counsel informed that request for adjournment was made to file detailed evidences and submissions to contest the addition ... request was accordingly made to set aside the case to the Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication of this appeal after giving an opportunity of being heard. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee assure that full compliance will be made to the notices issued by the Ld.CIT

Vediappan Selvam Mohan, Tiruvannamalai vs. Income Tax Officer, Tiruvannamalai

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

ITA 2929/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2929/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Vediappan Selvam Mohan, Income Tax Officer, No.1746, Kamarajar Nagar, Thanipadi, Ward-2, Tiruvannamalai, Thanipadi S.O, Tiruvannamalai, Tamil Nadu-608708. Chennai. [Pan: Bovpm0856C] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 250

assessee submitted that both the Ld. AO and the Ld. First Appellate Authority have passed ex-parte orders without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld.AO for re-adjudication ... matter de novo by examining the matter afresh in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued

Sikanthar Mydeen, Pallivasal Street, Sellur, Madurai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non.Corporate Ward 2(3), Madurai, Income Tax Office

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

ITA 2928/CHNY/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2928/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2018-19 Sikanthar Mydeen, Income Tax Officer, No.9/D1, Ahmisapuram Mela Theru Non.Corporate Ward-2(3), Extn, Pallivasal Street, Sellur, Madurai. Madurai-625002. [Pan: Cwqpm9546R] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri T.Vasudevan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri T.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 250

that both the Ld. AO and the Ld. First Appellate Authority have Page - 2 - of 5 passed ex-parte orders without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld.AO ... matter de novo by examining the matter afresh in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued

M/S. Ramakrishna Educational Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions 4, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assesse for ITA No

ITA 2923/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2923/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2922/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 M/S.Ramakrishna Educational Income Tax Officer Charitable Trust, Exemptions-4, No.53, South Bazaar Street, Chennai. Pattabiram, Chennai-72. [Pan: Aagts0203H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri K.Gopalakrishnan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri K.Gopalakrishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 250Section 270A

assessee submitted that both the Ld. AO and the Ld. First Appellate Authority have passed ex-parte orders without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld.CIT ... novo by examining the matter afresh in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. The Ld. . CIT(A) shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued

M/S. Ramakrishna Educational Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions 4, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assesse for ITA No

ITA 2922/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2923/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2922/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2018-19 M/S.Ramakrishna Educational Income Tax Officer Charitable Trust, Exemptions-4, No.53, South Bazaar Street, Chennai. Pattabiram, Chennai-72. [Pan: Aagts0203H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri K.Gopalakrishnan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri K.Gopalakrishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 250Section 270A

assessee submitted that both the Ld. AO and the Ld. First Appellate Authority have passed ex-parte orders without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld.CIT ... novo by examining the matter afresh in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. The Ld. . CIT(A) shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued

Goundampalayam Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society, Tirupur vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Tirupur

ITA 2920/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2920 /Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2017-18 K-1755 Goundampalayam Agricultural Cooperative Society, Ganapathypalayam(Po), Veerapandi(Via) Tirupur Tamil Nadu-641605. [Pan: Aaalk1190P] Primary Credit Goundampalayam Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Tirupur (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri N.V.Narayanan, Advocate Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit 21.01.2025 07.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1068729587(1) Dated 17.09.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2017-18. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 250 Dated 17.09.2024 Passed By Nfac, Delhi.

Section 250Section 80P

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH: CHENNAI श्री यस यस विश्वनेत्र रवि

Mr. Venkataraman Swaminathan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncc-19(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2603/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2603/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Mr.Venkataraman Swaminathan, Income Tax Officer, No.28/1, Velu Street, Non.Corporate Circle-19(1), West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai-600 033. [Pan: Aasps3855R] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)

lower authorities and direct the Ld. AO to recalculate assesse claim by examining the case employee wise after giving due opportunity of being heard and by passing a speaking order. The Assessee shall comply with statutory notices issued by the Ld.AO. Any non-compliance may be adversely viewed. Accordingly