← 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

Apparao Mutchakarla, Vizag vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Vizag

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 4/VIZ/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.04/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2007-08) Apparao Mutchakarla, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Vizag. Income Tax, Pan: Ahvpm 9813 F Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC with a direction to decide the case on merits after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with the principles of natural justice. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly

Venkatanarayana Peetha, Godavarru vs. Income Tax Officer, Tenali

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

ITA 309/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.309/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Venkatanarayana Peetha Vs. Income Tax Officer House No.4-41, Godavarru Village Ward-1 Duggirala Mandalam Tenali Guntur [Pan : Byspp4577L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 143(3)Section 69A

Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee has sources for the cash deposits made and pleaded that the assessee may be provided an opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate it’s claim with material evidences, in the interest of justice. 4 I.T.A. No.309/Viz/2023, A.Y.2017-18 Venkata Narayana Peetha ... derived for the last 15 years and the commission received as real estate agent, besides agricultural income. The assessee pleaded for one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate it’s case with material evidences. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case

Vellanki Bala Bhaskar Rao, Eluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Eluru

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

ITA 293/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.293/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Vellanki Bala Bhaskar Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Flat No.A5, Harsha Palace Ward-2 Tikkanna Somayajulu Street Eluru Ashok Nagar, Eluru [Pan : Alopb3230C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.Madhusudan, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

resources to meet the impugned cash deposits made in the banking organizations, identified by the Ld.AO/CIT(A). He, therefore, pleaded to afford an opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his case by filing required documentary evidences such as confirmation letters from loan creditors / banker’s statements ... aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the principles of natural justice and considering the plea of the assessee to provide an opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A), we are inclined to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to afford

Mudu Gopa Raju, Prop Royal Wines, Krishna Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudivada

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

ITA 133/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.133/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Mudu Gopa Raju Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop. Royal Wines Ward-1 2-78, Sivalayam Veedhi Gudivada Tempalli, Krishna Dist. [Pan : Boypg1989P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 679ASection 69Section 69A

Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee has sources for the cash deposits made and pleaded that the assessee may be provided an opportunity of being heard before the 5 I.T.A. No.133/Viz/2023, A.Y.2017-18 Mudu Gopa Raju Prop.Royal Wines, Krishna Dist. Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate it’s claim with material evidences ... contention of the assessee is the assessee has sources for the cash deposits made in the bank account and pleaded for one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate it’s case with material evidences. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case

I.T.O., Ward-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Gabhawala Tax Advisors Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known As M/S Ostrich Tie Up Pvt. Ltd.), Gurubagh

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 1831/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: N on eFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 5(2)Section 6Section 68

assessee and ignoring the fact that notice u/s 148 was issued after obtaining necessary approval and the order was passed after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

Diya Exports, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3379/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Bleand

Section 133(6)

impugned five parties and the Assessing Officer is directed to examine the same and decide the issue afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court

Mack Star Marketing Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1812/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Ble

Section 23

documentary evidences and the Assessing Officer is directed to examine / verify the same and decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 15. The contention that some of the sales are illegal and since no sale consideration has been received the same ... year under consideration and the Assessing Officer is directed to examine the same and decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes. 31. To sum-up, both

Mack Star Marketing Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1709/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Ble

Section 23

documentary evidences and the Assessing Officer is directed to examine / verify the same and decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 15. The contention that some of the sales are illegal and since no sale consideration has been received the same ... year under consideration and the Assessing Officer is directed to examine the same and decide the issue afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 30. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes. 31. To sum-up, both

Brilliant Metals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 5(2), Delhi

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

ITA 3883/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deepanshu Singla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment proceedings de novo after affording an opportunity of being heard to the 3 Brilliant Metals Pvt. Ltd. assesse. The assessee shall comply to the notices issued by the department from time to time

Shashank Tiwari, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3098/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

manner of depositing the employees contribution towards PF & ESI and decide the issue accordingly. Needless to mention, the Assessing Officer must afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before deciding the issue.” 7. Since, the facts are similar on merit, the Assessing Officer is directed to examine

Subhash Chand Dhingra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 51(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 2914/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Kavita, CAFor Respondent: Sh.Shyam Singh, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 69A

which includes Business receipts, Interest on Fixed Deposits & SB Account, proceeds from LIC, rentals from House Property, etc. without giving a proper opportunity of being heard. 2 Asha Dhingra Legal Representative of Late Sh. Subhash Chand Dhingra 3. That the Ld. AO grossly erred on the facts as well ... justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment proceedings de novo after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assesse. The assessee shall comply to the notices issued by the department from time to time. 3 Asha Dhingra Legal Representative

Instrumentation Laboratory India Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 10(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2051/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Instrumentation Laboratory Vs. Dcit India Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(2) 1471-1476, 14Th Floor, New Delhi Aggarwal Millennium Tower- 2, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi Pan: Aabci6557N Appellant Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 234BSection 234CSection 271

Charan Banerjee v Sambalpur Municipality, AIR 1979 Orissa 69, has held that right of appeal wherever conferred includes a right of being afforded opportunity of being heard irrespective of language conferring such right that is a part and parcel of principles of natural justice. Where an authority is required ... quasi-judicial capacity, it is imperative to give appellant an adequate opportunity of being heard before deciding the appeal. The aim of the rule of natural justice is to prevent miscarriage of justice and denial of principles of audi alteram partem results into such miscarriage of justice. Therefore, the Learned

Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd, Lucknow vs. ACIT Reang-1, Lucknow

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

ITA 19/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2015-16 Pahari Mata Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. V. The Assistant 761, Village – Anaura Commissioner Of Near Indira Canal Income Tax Faizabad Road, Lucknow Range-I, Lucknow Pan:Aabap6918L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18 04 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 18 04 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, DR
Section 43C

order of the ld. CIT(A) with the contention that the ld. CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He has further contended that on the last date of hearing before the ld. CIT(A), NFAC

Ganesh Shankar Pujare, Sindhudurg vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Kudal

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 40/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.40/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ganesh Shankar Pujare, Vs. Ito, Ward, Kudal. Bidyewadi, At Post Kalmath, Taluka Kankavli, Sindhudurg- 416602. Pan : Anipp5657R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar : Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 17.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.04.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Assailing The Order Dated 08.11.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A) [‘Nfac’] For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “I. Legality & Validity Of Reassessment Proceeding; 1. On The Facts & In Law, The Re-Assessment Proceeding Initiated By The Ld. Assessing Officer Under Section 147 Of The Act Is Bad In Law As The Same Is Based On Suspicious & Incorrect Information. Hence, As The Formation Of Belief Is Based On Incorrect, Suspicious & Vague Facts Same Is Unsus Tainable In Eye Of Law. 2. On The Facts & In Law, There Is Serious Jurisdictional Requirement In The Reasons Recorded By The Assessing Officer As He

For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

this non compliance. But at the same time to meet the ends of natural justice we deem it proper to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant assessee so that he can substantiate his claim by furnishing relevant documents & 6 Ganesh Shankar Pujare explanations. Hence without going ... side the impugned first appellate order & remand the matter back to the file of LD CIT(A) for fresh decision after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant assessee. We also direct the appellant assessee to appear/submit reply & documents in support of his contentions before

Vallabhdas Valji Jilha Vachanalaya, Jalgaon vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption - Pune, Pune

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

ITA 1423/PUN/2023[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Apr 2024

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1423/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :- Vallabhdas Valjijilha The Commissioner Of Vachanalaya, Vs Income Tax- 227, Navi Peth, Jalgaon, Exemption, Pune. Jalgaon – 425001. Pan: Aabtv0802C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Dr Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Under Section 80G Of The Act, Dated 26.10.2023. The Ld.Cit(E) Dismissed The Application Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Application Is Time Barred. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground(S) Of Appeal : “1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Thecommissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption) Pune Has Erred In Rejecting The Application In Form 10Ab Under Section 80G(5) Of The Vallabhdas Valji Jilha Vachanalaya [A]

Section 10Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

case referred to in sub-clause (B) of clause (iv) of the first proviso, rejecting such application, after affording it a reasonable opportunity of being heard;] (iii) ……. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune in the case of the Assessee held that the Activities of the Assessee had commenced

Sanjay Kumar Tingrikar, Hyderabad vs. JCIT., Rang-7, Hyderabad

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

ITA 183/HYD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.183/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Kumar Vs. Jt. Cit, Range-7 Tingrikar, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppt8912F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav Dr Appeared For Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/04/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/04/2024

For Appellant: Advocate S SandhyaFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav DR appeared for Smt. Sheetal
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271Section 271D

dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Further, the learned CIT (A) had also discussed the issues on merit without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee has also explained the reasons for non-appearance before the learned CIT (A) and as per the learned Counsel

Saab Technologies B.V.(Formerly Known S, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., International Taxation, Circle-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, ITA No. 153/KOL/2022 is allowed

ITA 153/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sri Anikesh Banerjee & Sri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)Section 144C

documentary evidence or justification with respect to any of the additions was brought on record. Also, the Ld. AO did not provide sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings and passed the assessment order without taking into account the principles of natural justice

Shivashree Souharda Credit Co-Operative Limited, Tumakuru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Tumkur

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

ITA 300/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 234Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

files of Ld.AO to examine the same de novo in the light of the above judgment. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard is to be granted to assess in accordance with law.” 5.1 In view of the order of the ITAT, which is identical to the facts

Income Tax Officer - 42(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Kinjal Manish Seth, Mumbai

Accordingly, the Ground No. 1 to 4 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2883/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: giving relief to the assessee? 3. The relevant facts in brief are that the Assessee is an importer/dealer in industrial and commercial goods. For the

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh KalyaniFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 609CSection 69C

Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not giving an opportunity of being heard to the A.O before giving relief to the assessee?” 3. The relevant facts in brief are that the Assessee is an importer/dealer

Vaidya Mangat Rai Foundation, Chandigarh vs. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

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

ITA 2668/DEL/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmavaidya Mangat Rai The Commissioner Of Foundation Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Friends Colony Chandigarh Gali No.2, Hansi Road Bhiwani. Pan-Aadtv 6078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Sapna Bhattia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 25/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2024

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

case referred to in sub-clause (B) of clause (iv) of the first proviso, rejecting such application, after affording it a reasonable opportunity of being heard;] (iii) …….” 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur in the case of the Assessee held that the Activities of the Assessee had commenced