← 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

Nanik Education Society, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward, Thane

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

ITA 4501/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

learned CIT(A) (NFAC), has erred in upholding the Assessment Order passed by Assessing Officer without not only providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard but without even appreciating the facts and merits of the case. 3. On the facts and in circumstances of the case

Graceworks Realty & Leisure Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4389/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rupak ChaudhariFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 250Section 263

erred in passing order dated 29.03.2023 under section 144 r.w.s 263 read with section 144B of the Act, without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 3. Heard both the sides. Record perused. 4. The relevant facts in brief are that regular assessment was framed

Kailash Hemsingh Thakur, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 26(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 4119/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal: A.Y : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramaniamFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule

order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal

ITO-13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 2739/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleito-13(2)(1) V. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 701, Central Plaza 147, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Daftari Road, Malad (East) M. K. Marg, Mumbai Mumbai, Maharashtra -400097 Maharashtra-400020 Pan: Aalcs9354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Jaiprakash Bairaga & Rupa Nanda Department Represented By : Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

mistake in the issue of notice or defective service of notice does not affect the jurisdiction of the assessing officer, if otherwise reasonable opportunity of being heard has been given. (ii) Issue of notice as prescribed in the Rules constitutes a part of reasonable opportunity of being heard

Mangal Singh, Sadarpur Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 863/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: him, therefore, proceeded to make the assessment u/s 144 r. w. section 147 of the Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). Further, he agreed that several opportunities were given by the Ld. CIT(A) as well and assessee could not represent his case due to non-receipt of the notices, however, he submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has proceeded to dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine without deciding the issue on merits. He submitted that the assessee has not proved the source of cash depos

Section 144Section 147Section 234A

keeping in view the additions/disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, we are of the opinion that assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, in the interest of justice we are of the Mangal Singh vs. ITO view that this matter should go back to the file ... shall cooperate with the proceedings before the Assessing Officer without taking unnecessary adjournments. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, this appeal is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer accordingly. 7. In the result, appeal filed

Indu Suri, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-29(1), Delhi

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

ITA 810/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: The Cit(A).

passed ex-parte order without hearing the Assessee which is in violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, sought for an opportunity of being heard to the assessee by remanding the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the Appeal before ... novo adjudication of the Appeal filed by the assessee with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to provide the opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the CIT(A), ordered accordingly. 3 Indu Suri

Indranil Datta, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

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

ITA 805/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: the A.O. ordered accordingly. 5. In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open Court on 10th MAY, 2024 (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 10/05/2024 R.N, Sr.ps (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) (Judicial Member)

even the Ld. A.O. has also passed the Assessment Order without affording sufficient opportunity to put forth his case, therefore, sought for an opportunity of being heard to the assessee by remanding the matter to the file of the A.O. for fresh adjudication. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative ... issue to the file of the Ld. A.O. for de-novo adjudication with a direction to the Ld. A.O. to provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass fresh 3 Indranil Datta Vs. ITO Assessment Order. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the Assessment Proceedings

Gaurav Dhanrajgir Verma, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Office, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 325/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 147Section 44A

failed to appreciate that the assessment had been made by the AO without providing to the assessee a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard. That infact, no show cause notice had been issued by the AO before framing the impugned assessment proposing to make the addition ... such in the circumstances of the case, he ought to have held that the assessee had not been given a fair and proper opportunity of being heard and the assessment has been made in haste which is liable to be struck down. 5. That the learned CIT(A) has failed

Vikas Sharma, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Ghaziabad

In the result, Appeal in ITA No

ITA 3048/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Counsel for the assessee submitted that both the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A) were passed ex-parte without giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, sought for remanding the matter to the file of the A.O. for fresh consideration. 3. The Ld. Departmental Representative ... well as CIT(A) have passed orders ex-parte without hearing the assessee, we are of the opinion that if an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee, the substantial justice would be rendered. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order of the A.O. as well

Vikas Sharma, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, Appeal in ITA No

ITA 3047/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Counsel for the assessee submitted that both the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A) were passed ex-parte without giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, sought for remanding the matter to the file of the A.O. for fresh consideration. 3. The Ld. Departmental Representative ... well as CIT(A) have passed orders ex-parte without hearing the assessee, we are of the opinion that if an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee, the substantial justice would be rendered. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order of the A.O. as well

Home Credit International A.S., Czech Republic vs. Assistant. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal is partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 2068/DEL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9(1)(vi)

that the Assessing Officer shall pass the final assessment order in conformity with the directions issued by learned DRP without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The purpose for not providing any opportunity of being heard to the assessee at the final assessment stage is only ... final assessment order. The Commissioner will thereafter proceed in accordance with law after issuing notice to the concerned AO and affording him an opportunity of being heard. 43. Mr. Manchanda then submitted that this Court should clarify that in terms of Section 153 (3) B of the Act, the Revenue

Dayalo Devi HUF, Panchkula vs. ITO, Ward-1, Panchkula

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

ITA 300/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri B.M. Monga, Advocate and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 23Section 250Section 28Section 57

file is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall

Sh. Babu Singh S/O Sh. Kunda Singh, Fatehabad vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

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

ITA 342/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

mode, or through e-mail, etc. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has requested that the assessee may be given proper and adequate opportunity of being heard to present his case. 5. The ld. DR has relied on the order of the ld. PCIT. 6. Considering the above facts ... case, we deem it fit and appropriate that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be provided a reasonable and proper opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, the file is restored to the file of the ld. PCIT to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law after giving reasonable

Rameshchander Reddy Chada, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Hyderbad

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

ITA 234/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 234/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Rameshchander Reddy Chada, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Ward-4(3), [Pan : Aavpc2861N] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/05/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 09/05/2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR
Section 250Section 250(6)

merits, without seeking any adjournments and the learned CIT(A) to take a fresh look at the matter, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We order accordingly. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

Talented Aspirants Peoples Action to the Society for Vigorous India, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Exemption Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 222/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaनिर्धारण अपीलधर्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / आ.अपी.सं वर्ा / Appellant Respondent / Ita No. A.Y. Talented Aspirants 222/Hyd/2024 2018-19 Dcit, Peoples Action To Exemption The Society For Circle-1(1), Vigorous India, Hyderabad 208/Hyd/2024 2021-22 Hyderabad [Pan: Aaatt6716A]

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)

expenditure account, i.e. to the extent the same are allowable under the Act. Needless to say, the Ld. AO shall grant a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in the course of set-aside proceedings. 13. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 222/Hyd/2024 ... allowable under the Act. Needless to say, the Ld. AO shall grant a Page 7 of 9 ITA Nos. 222 & 208/Hyd/2024 reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in the course of set-aside proceedings. 16. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 208/Hyd/2024 for A.Y.2021-22

Talented Aspirants Peoples Action to the Society for Vigorous India, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 208/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaनिर्धारण अपीलधर्थी / प्रत्‍यर्थी / आ.अपी.सं वर्ा / Appellant Respondent / Ita No. A.Y. Talented Aspirants 222/Hyd/2024 2018-19 Dcit, Peoples Action To Exemption The Society For Circle-1(1), Vigorous India, Hyderabad 208/Hyd/2024 2021-22 Hyderabad [Pan: Aaatt6716A]

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)

expenditure account, i.e. to the extent the same are allowable under the Act. Needless to say, the Ld. AO shall grant a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in the course of set-aside proceedings. 13. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 222/Hyd/2024 ... allowable under the Act. Needless to say, the Ld. AO shall grant a Page 7 of 9 ITA Nos. 222 & 208/Hyd/2024 reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in the course of set-aside proceedings. 16. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 208/Hyd/2024 for A.Y.2021-22

Flex Trade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cen Cir. 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 229/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 228 & 229/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Flex Trade Private Limited Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Room No. 205 Vs 13, B.B. Ganguly Street Kolkata - 700012 [Pan : Aaacf6723A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Kolkata – 27, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dt. 08/12/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Several Grounds Of Appeal In Both These Appeals But The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee, Before Us Submitted That The Orders Of The Ld. First Appellate Authority Passed In Both These Appeals Are Ex-Parte & Assessee Was Not Afforded Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Disposed Off The Appeals On Merits & If It Had Been So, The Assessee Stood A Fair Chance In Succeeding. Therefore, He Prayed That Both The Appeals Be Restored To 2

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 250

Flex Trade Private Limited the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after providing the assessee opportunity of being heard. The ld. D/R, though not leaving his grounds, did not oppose this request of the ld. Counsel for the assessee. 3. We have heard rival contentions ... file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merit. The ld. CIT(A) shall afford the assessee with sufficient opportunity of being heard and thereafter pass a speaking order on merit of the case. Needless to mention that the assessee shall produce all necessary documents/evidence in support

Flex Trade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cen. Cir. 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 228/KOL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 228 & 229/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Flex Trade Private Limited Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Room No. 205 Vs 13, B.B. Ganguly Street Kolkata - 700012 [Pan : Aaacf6723A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Kolkata – 27, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dt. 08/12/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Several Grounds Of Appeal In Both These Appeals But The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee, Before Us Submitted That The Orders Of The Ld. First Appellate Authority Passed In Both These Appeals Are Ex-Parte & Assessee Was Not Afforded Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Disposed Off The Appeals On Merits & If It Had Been So, The Assessee Stood A Fair Chance In Succeeding. Therefore, He Prayed That Both The Appeals Be Restored To 2

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 250

Flex Trade Private Limited the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after providing the assessee opportunity of being heard. The ld. D/R, though not leaving his grounds, did not oppose this request of the ld. Counsel for the assessee. 3. We have heard rival contentions ... file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merit. The ld. CIT(A) shall afford the assessee with sufficient opportunity of being heard and thereafter pass a speaking order on merit of the case. Needless to mention that the assessee shall produce all necessary documents/evidence in support

Ramotar Choudhari HUF, Kolkata vs. PCIT 5 Kolkata, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1336/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1336/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ramotar Choudhari Huf.……..…………............…...……………....Appellant 7Th Floor, R.N 25 Fortuna Tower, 23A N.S. Road, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aanhr9093K] Vs. Pcit-5, Kolkata………….…...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Pransukha, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 09, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 18.10.2023 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,55,970/- On 21.01.2014. Thereafter, An Information Was Received By The Assessing Officer From Investigation Wing That The Assessee Has

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 263

Officer is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, he, may, after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such inquiry as he deems necessary, pass such order thereon as the circumstances ... incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to: (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as he deems necessary. It is only on fulfilment of these twin conditions

Narayan Singh Rajput, Khandwa vs. ITO-1, Khandwa

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

ITA 19/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Indore09 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninarayan Singh Rajput Ito-1 Wardno.2 Jamniya Road Khandwa Mundi Punasa Vs. Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bripr0714A Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2024

Section 144Section 148

facts and circumstances of the case and applicable law, both the Ld. AO and the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not giving reasonable opportunity of being heard.” 5. Ld. DR has fairly submitted that since the assessment order was passed on best judgment basis and the CIT(A) has also