← 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

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 618/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 617/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 616/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 615/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 614/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 613/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 612/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 611/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

order with pre-mediated mind without dealing with various question of facts and law raised by the appellant and without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 9. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and in confirming the penalty amounting

Inner Strength Foundation, New Delhi vs. ITO(E), Ward-1(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5207/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI G.S.PANNU (Vice President), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

passed by the ld. AO in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2016-17. The ld. AO is further directed to grant an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to consider the evidence on record or any other evidences which the assessee may choose to file in support

M/S. South Asian Hospitality Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5967/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Aggarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Rishpal Bedi, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(6)

that there is no entry in the books of account of the assessee pertaining to the payment made by cheque in question; that opportunity of being heard has not been provided to the assessee during assessment proceedings and relied upon the judgments cited as CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal 2015- TIOL

M/S. South Asian Hospitality Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5966/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Aggarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Rishpal Bedi, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(6)

that there is no entry in the books of account of the assessee pertaining to the payment made by cheque in question; that opportunity of being heard has not been provided to the assessee during assessment proceedings and relied upon the judgments cited as CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal 2015- TIOL

Shri Vidhyanagar Jain Society, Bhavnagar vs. CIT (Exemption0, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 862/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.862/Ahd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : - Shri Vidhyanagar Jain Society The Cit (Exemption) Plot No.75-C बनाम/ Ahmedabad Chitranjan Chowk V/S. Vidhyanagar, Bhavnagar Gujarat –364 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aavts 5757 K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Malhar Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: The Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us Against The Order Passed Under Section 12Ab/(1)(B)(Ii) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Dated 26-02-2024 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(E)”] On The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri Malhar Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR
Section 12A

order of the Ld.CIT(E) and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(E) for deciding afresh, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to co-operate with the proceedings and to file the relevant documents before the Ld.CIT

Pradeep Kumar Sara, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 9(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 950/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.950/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 250

necessary to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard and direct the assessee to file necessary evidence and documents in support of his submission. If the additional evidence are filed then

Soumendra Gupta, Sujapur, Malda vs. ITO, Ward - 3(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1022/KOL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.1022/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

notice was not received either in mobile or e I.T.A. No. 1022/Kol/2024 Soumendra Gupta AY : 2014-15 mail of the assessee hence reasonable opportunity of being heard was not granted. 2. For that even otherwise, the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits instead of summarily dismissing

Kerala Agricultural University Co-Op Society, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 153/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ilaiyaraja K.S., Senior DR
Section 148Section 80P

restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee 4 5 ITA Nos.152-153/Coch/2023 Kerala Agricultural University Co-op Society. and also after considering the documents, if any, filed ... remit the issue to the file of the ld.CIT(A) with the very same directions, for deciding it afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open

Kerala Agricultural University Co-Op Society, Thrissur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 152/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ilaiyaraja K.S., Senior DR
Section 148Section 80P

restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee 4 5 ITA Nos.152-153/Coch/2023 Kerala Agricultural University Co-op Society. and also after considering the documents, if any, filed ... remit the issue to the file of the ld.CIT(A) with the very same directions, for deciding it afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open

Manoj Kumar Motwani, Betul Mp vs. Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax Department NFAC

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 151/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2013-14 Manoj Kumar Motwani, Acit, Prop. Neelam Store, Nfac, Lally Chowk, Delhi बनाम/ Kothi Bazar, Vs. Betul (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaupm8830E Assessee By Shri Rakesh Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2024

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 253(5)Section 69A

merits of the case. Needles to say, the CIT( Appeals) shall in the course of the set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 8. Accordingly, to maintain the rule of consistency we follow the earlier decisions of the Tribunal cited above and consequently

M/S. Avinash Chalana & Co., Bhopal vs. PCIT-1, Bhopal

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 204/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263

whereby the order of the AO has been cancelled with the direction that the AO shall pass assessment order denovo after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Aggrieved by the impugned order the assessee has filed present appeal. 3. At the outset, Ld. Sr. counsel has submitted ... propose to suitably revise the order u/s 263, which may include setting aside the order as such. Accordingly, an opportunity of being heard is extended to you to explain your case along with details, documents and necessary evidences Absence of any submission or reply shall lead to the conclusion that

Rajendra Kumar Meena, Gangapur vs. ITO Ward-2 Sawamadhopur, Gangapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 516/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 234A

grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in passing ex-party order without providing adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard in the gross breach of law. Hence the additions so made by the ld. AO may kindly be quashed and delete. 3. Rs.46 ... /NFAC is reiterated here in below: “Observation and Decision It is observed from the records that the appellant was provided multiple opportunities of being heard by way of issue of hearing notices. But appellant has not responded to the said notices. From the non responding conduct of the appellant

Bhadra Sahakari Sakkare Kharkhane Niyamitha, Doddabathi, Davangere vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Davangere.

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

ITA 971/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha, R., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 43B

that would be essential and required for substantiating his case and for proper adjudication by the revenue authorities. Needless to say that reasonable opportunity of being heard be given to the assessee. The assessee is directed to update their email-id Telephone /Mobile No. and address for communication and cooperate