“opportunity of being heard”

Koneru Vanaja Devi L/R of Koneru Venkata Satya Hanuman Prasad (Late), Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Vijayawada

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.159/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2013-14) Smt. Koneru Vanaja Devi, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, L/R Of Koneru Venkata Satya Ward-2(4), Hanuman Prasad (Late), Vijayawada. Dr. No. 64-5-20, Patamatalanka, Vijayawada – 520010. Pan: Apapk 7923 D (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Madhukar Aves, Sr. Ar

Revenue Authorities ie., the Ld. AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC have passed the ex-parte orders without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the Ld. AR requested that the matter may be remitted back

Sri Seetaramanjanenya Sortex, Kakinada vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.147/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 1-2015/A, Uppalanka Income Tax Kakinada Visakhapatnam [Pan : Abdfs4641P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

applicability of TDS provision on expenditures towards interest, commission, contract & professional charges and directed the AO to pass a suitable order giving reasonably opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6 I.T.A. No.147/Viz/2023, A.Y.2018-19 Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex, Kakinada 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.PCIT, the assessee preferred ... appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal : 1. That the Ld.PCIT has not given opportunity of being heard virtually as order u/s 263 dated 29.03.2023 has been passed ex- parte, which is unlawful and against the principal of natural justice. 2 That the Ld.PCIT

M/S Poornachand Agrawal, Bilaspur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 104/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Pooranchand Agrawal C/O. Bagadia Enterprises, Near Shiv Talkies, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495001 Pan : Aaifp8483G

Agrawal Vs. Pr. CIT, Raipur-1 the assessment order and directed the A.O. to frame the assessment after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. For the sake of clarity, the relevant observations of the Pr. CIT are culled out as under: “8. The reply of the assessee ... direction to pass a fresh assessment order in a speaking manner after making all necessary enquiries required and after providing due and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering all the submissions, etc. made and counter-reply submitted by the assessee in a fair and judicious

Jagdishchandra Shantilal Chhatralia, Ahmedabad vs. ITO WD 2(2)(3), RKT, Rajkot

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2016-17

this case back to the file of the CIT(A) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessment Year: 2016-17 Page 2 of 3 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by making addition

M/S. Lgf Vitrified Pvt. Ltd., Morbi vs. The CIT-3, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.226/Rjt/2019 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Year: 2016-17 M/S. Lfg Vitrified Pvt. Ltd., The Principle Commissioner Survey No.358 At Rangpar, Vs. Of Income Tax-3, Morbi-363641 Rajkot.

inquiries & verification of all relevant aspects of the case, the A.O. shall pass a speaking order, after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned PCIT, the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. The learned AR before us filed

Nirmal Barik, Bhadrak vs. ITO, Bhadrak

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.289/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Nirmal Barik, Vs Ito, Bhadrak Padhuan Padhuan, Anantapur, Bhadrak Pan No. :Alfpb 5745 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Biswojit Sahoo, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15.03.2023, Passed In Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1050798334, For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Delayed By 104 Days For Which The Assessee Has Filed Necessary Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay, Wherein He Has Mentioned That The Assessee Failed To File The Instant Appeal Within The Time Due To Health Problems. The Affidavit Filed By The Assessee Has Not Found To Be False. Consequently, The Delay Of 104 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & The Appeal Is Disposed Off On Merits.

justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court

Mr. Prafulla Kumar Mahapatra, Bhadrak vs. A.C.I.T Balasore Circle, Balasore

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

been disposed off by the ld. CIT(A) without hearing the assessee. It was the prayer that the assessee may be granted another opportunity of being heard. 3. In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee had been granted sufficient opportunities by the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee ... issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 28/11/2023. (GIRISH AGRAWAL

Rotary Public School, Angul vs. ITO Ward Angul, Angul

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.286/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Rotary Public School Angul, Vs Ito, Ward Angul, Angul Vip Road Angul, Angul-759122 Pan No. :Aacar 1936 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 27.07.2023, Passed In Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1054672129(1), For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Had Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Ao Before The Ld. Cit(A). It Was The Submission That The Assessee Had Not Received The Notice Of Hearing From The Ld. Cit(A). It Was The Prayer That The Assessee May Be Granted Another Opportunity To Represent Its Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). 3. In Reply, Ld. Dr Vehemently Supported The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) & Submitted That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Adjudicated The Issue On Merits & There Was No Reason That Issues Could Be Restored To The File Of Ld. Cit(A)

notices issued, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to produce all the material evidence to substantiate its claim before the AO. Should the assessee not cooperate

Rakesh Agarwal, Khetrajpur vs. DCIT Central Circle, Sambalpur

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.270/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Rakesh Agarwal, Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur C/O: Ishita Enterprises, At:Po: Khetrajpur, Dist : Sambalpur-768003 Pan No. :Alhpa 3599 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 15.03.2023, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.Bhubaneswar-2/10105/2012-13, For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Is Deriving Income From Business. In The Course Of Assessment, Notices Were Issued To The Assessee, Wherein It Was Asked To Explain The Cash Deposit Of Rs.1,86,750/-. The Assessee Had Not Given The Explanation & Consequently The Ao Had Made The Addition. On Appeal, The Ld. Cit(A) Had Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee In The Absence Of Any Explanation. It Was The Prayer That The Issues In This Appeal May Be Restored To The File Of Ao So That The Assessee Can Provide Explanation Before The Ao.

interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld. AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court

Manju Devi Bagaria, Rourkela vs. ITO Ward-1, Rourkela

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Girish Agrawalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.243/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Manju Devi Bagaria, Vs Ito, Ward-1, Rourkela Kk-24, Civil Township, Rourkela Pan No. :Abbpb 8915 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agarwalla, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 20.06.2023, Passed In Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1053823281(1), For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Has Been Disposed Off By The Ld. Cit(A) Without Hearing The Assessee. It Was The Prayer That The Assessee May Be Granted Another Opportunity Of Being Heard. 3. In Reply, Ld. Sr. Dr Submitted That The Assessee Had Been Granted Sufficient Opportunities By The Ld. Cit(A) & The Assessee Has Not Produced The Evidence Before The Ld. Cit(A). Consequently, The Ld. Cit(A)

been disposed off by the ld. CIT(A) without hearing the assessee. It was the prayer that the assessee may be granted another opportunity of being heard. 3. In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee had been granted sufficient opportunities by the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee ... transactions, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court

Odisha Cooperative Tassar and Silk Federation Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT Circle 4(1), Bhubaneswar

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

interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of 2 ld. CIT(A) after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. If the assessee continues to maintain its lackadaisical attitude, liberty is available with the ld. CIT(A) to draw adverse inference