← 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

Society for Upliftment Education and Health Society, (Suleh), Raipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 20/RPR/2023[Not Applicable]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 20/Rpr/2023 Society For Upliftment Education & Health Society, (Known As -Suleh) A-4, Ward No.32, Anand Vihar Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Abfas5044P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Bhopal (M.P) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

rejecting application for grant of registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 of the society without giving proper opportunity of being heard as per demand of law and principle of natural justice. 3) The appellant reserves the right to add, amend, or alter/ withdraw any ground ... satisfied, pass an order in writing rejecting such application and also canceling its registration after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard;" (emphasis supplied by us) 8. On a careful perusal of the order of the CIT(Exemption), Bhopal, it transpires that it is a matter of fact borne from

Abis Export India Pvt. Ltd., Rajnandgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhilai, Durg

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

ITA 194/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 194/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Abis Export India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ib, Corporate House, Indamara, Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhilai Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aacca2881J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bikram Jain, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am: The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) Dated 28.03.2023 For A.Y.2018-19. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax—Raipur-1 Has Erred In Holding The Assessment Order Passed By The National E-Assessment Centre (Neac) On 01.03.2021 As Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue As The Order Was Passed Without Making Any Enquiry On The Issues Of Applicability Of Section 14A Of The I. T. Act, 1961. The Assessment Order Passed By The Neac Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Therefore The Order U/S 263 Passed By The Ld. Cit Is Unjustified, Unwarranted & Uncalled. 2. The Assessee Reserves The Right To Add, Amend Or Alter Any Grounds Of Appeal At Any Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 801ASection 80I

aside the order of A.O to his file for making necessary enquiries and to pass a speaking order after proving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with the said order of the Ld. Pr. CIT, the assessee has preferred an appeal before ... extracted as under: 10 9. The Ld. CIT-DR on the other hand vehemently supported the order of the Pr. CIT, wherein opportunity of being heard was granted to the assessee and also to submit his contention before the A.O, was provided, therefore, the order of the Pr. CIT cannot

Manohar Mal & Co., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 240/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 240/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Manohar Mal & Co. Halwai Lane, Main Road, Sadar Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aadfm8711B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

facilitate a cross-examination of Shri Narayan Sahu (supra) after affording a 12 Manohar Mal & Co. Vs. ACIT, Circle-4(1), Raipur reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee firm which shall remain at liberty to substantiate the authenticity of its aforesaid sale transaction on the basis of fresh

Gopal Sponge & Power Pvt. Ltd, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed, in terms of our observations here in above

ITA 226/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 226/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Gopal Sponge & Power Pvt. Ltd., Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Village- Siltara, Near Industrial Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur, (C.G.) Growth Centre, Phase- 2, Raipur, (C.G.) Pan: Aaccg1525F (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri B. Subramanyam, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.K. Meena, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02-08-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17-10- 2023

For Appellant: Shri B. Subramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 801A(4)(iv)

counsel and to file the appeal before the ITAT. Ld. AR, accordingly, requested to condone the delay and to grant assessee an opportunity of being heard. After giving a thoughtful consideration to the facts and circumstances a/w supporting affidavits and evidence, causing the delay, we found it suitable to consider ... revenue in view of section 263 of the I.T. Act, thus, for set aside the assessment order to the AO, directing that proper opportunity of being heard to be provide to the assessee and to examine the mentioned issue afresh and accordingly passed fresh assessment order as per the provision

Sh. Ranjeet Singh, Alwar vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Alwar

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 439/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 439/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 Sh. Ranjeet Singh Village Sare Khurd, Tehsil Tijara, District, Alwar cuke Vs. ACIT Circle-01, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BTUPS 1352 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal (FCA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a lquokbZ dh rkjh[

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (FCA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a
Section 144Section 148Section 69A

decide the case of the assessee on merits after giving proper 6 Sh. Ranjeet Singh vs. ACIT, Circle-01, Alwar opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same time, the assessee is directed to represent and present all the facts before the ld. AO and should

Sri Nirmal Chandra Padhiary, Balasore vs. ACIT, Balasore Circle, Balasore

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

ITA 157/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.157/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Sri Nirmal Chandra Padhiary, Vs Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Bampada, Chhanpur, Birla Tyre Road, Balasore-756056 Pan No. :Acupp 0872 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mr. Somanath Sahoo, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 25.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1049108098(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Time Barred By 35 Days. In This Regard, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Filed An Application Along With Affidavit Of The Assessee For Condonation Of The Delay, To Which The Ld. Sr. Dr Has Not Raised Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. On Perusal Of The Application & The Affidavit Of The Assessee, We Found That The Delay Occurred Due To Bonafide Reasons. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 35 Days In Filing The Appeal & Appeal Is Disposed Off Finally. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That Two Additions Are Challenged In This Appeal, One Is Against The Disallowance Of Pf & Esi Paid Belatedly

For Appellant: Shri Mr. Somanath Sahoo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

identical findings the issue in this appeal is restored to the file of the AO for re-adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. This issue is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 11. In regard to the addition representing the peak credit of the undisclosed bank accounts

Pir Makhdum Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2255/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

audit report afresh to allow exemption under section 11 in accordance with law. Needless to say that the assessee be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is ordered accordingly. 9. In result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16/10/2023

Lal Babu Pandey, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 275/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: C. A
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Kolkata Bench in the case of Kanoi Paper & Industries Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra). Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the assessee is at liberty to provide all the necessary information in support of its contention.” I.T.A. Nos. 275 & 1232/Del/2023 ... Tribunal in the case of Kanoi Paper & Industries Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra). Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the assessee is at liberty to provide all the necessary information in support of its contention. Ground no.1 of grounds

Amadeus It Group Sa, Spain vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1) Int.Taxation, New Delhi

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

ITA 1742/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

appellant liable to tax in India as 'royalty' for the alleged use of Altea system by various airlines, without affording an opportunity of being heard to the appellant, in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. Re: Charge of interest 21. That the DRP/ assessing officer erred on facts

Lal Babu Pandey, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(4), Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1232/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: C. A
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Kolkata Bench in the case of Kanoi Paper & Industries Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra). Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the assessee is at liberty to provide all the necessary information in support of its contention.” I.T.A. Nos. 275 & 1232/Del/2023 ... Tribunal in the case of Kanoi Paper & Industries Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra). Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the assessee is at liberty to provide all the necessary information in support of its contention. Ground no.1 of grounds

Sarita, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 2(2)(4), Ghaizabad

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

ITA 2544/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M.Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sarita, Vs Ito, H.No.25, Strt Mohalla, Asalat Ward-2(2)(4), Naar, Pargana, Jalalabad Police Ghaziabad. Station, Muradnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201006. Pan-Dwpps6599A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Kumar, Adv. Respondent By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.10.2023

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)

natural justice, we hereby set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment to the AO to frame assessment afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is hereby, directed to cooperate in the assessment proceedings and not to seek adjournment without any reasonable cause

Sunil Kumar, Rohtak vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3560/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Navin Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

seems to not verified and made enquiry about such fact resulting thereby revenue loss to the government. 3. You are, therefore, given an opportunity of being heard and requested to attend my office at Room No. 101, Aayakar Bhawan, Opposite Mansarovar Park, Rohtak ... order u/s 143(3) passed in your case for the assessment year 2009-10. In case you do not wish to avail the opportunity of being heard in person or through authorized representative in support of your claim, you may send your written reply so as to reach this office

Manisha Jain, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 2(4), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3420/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

called ambiguous 3 I.T.A. No. 3420/Del/2018 wording in the notice [has not] impaired or prejudiced the right of the assessee to a reasonable opportunity of being heard". It went onto observe that for sustaining the piea of natural justice on the ground of absence of opportunity

R.S. Pabbla Constructions Pvt.Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 88/VIZ/2017[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Oct 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satya Sai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 40

behalf of the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee filed 2 Miscellaneous Applications with a prayer to recall the order to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. Considering the assessee’s request, the appeals were recalled, heard and disposed

R.S. Pabbla Constructions Pvt.Ltd., Visakhapatnam vs. The Dy. CIT, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 87/VIZ/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satya Sai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 40

behalf of the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee filed 2 Miscellaneous Applications with a prayer to recall the order to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. Considering the assessee’s request, the appeals were recalled, heard and disposed

Sanjay Grain Products(P) Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 293/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 293/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sanjay Grain Products (P) Ltd. 34-35, Adishwar Complex, Ram Nagar Para, Raipur-492 001 Pan : Aadcs5038G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Virat Verma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

have carefully perused the assessment order and the grounds of appeal submitted by the appellant. During the appellate proceedings, the following opportunities of being heard were granted- to the appellant vide notices u/s 250 of the Act issued through the ITBA portal which are summarized below: Sr. Date of notice ... effectively pursuing the same. 3.4 Considering the above facts and the records available, it is established that the appellant was provided many opportunities of being heard. However, the appellant has remained noncompliant. No material fact has been brought on record in support of the grounds of appeal or to rebut

Lalchand Ramnani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(3), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 288/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 288/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Lalchand Ramnani New Cloth Market, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Acnpr3983J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

restored to the file of the CIT(Appeals) with a direction to him to re-adjudicate the same after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 11. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 12. I have given thoughtful ... Income Tax Rules, 1962 that was filed before him vide letter dated 05.06.2018. Needless to say, the CIT(Appeals), shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee who shall remain at liberty to substantiate his claim /contention on the basis of fresh documentary evidence

Shri Arun Agrawal, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 214/RPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 214/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Arun Agrawal 85, Pandri Textile Market, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan :Acjpa2323D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69

Learned CIT (Appeal) is not justified in passing the order and confirming the addition in an ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereby violating the principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Learned CIT (Appeal) is liable ... also subordinate to him, then he is under an obligation to record his reasons for doing so after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter wherever it is possible to do so. For the sake of clarity sub-section (1) of Section 127 is culled

M/S Shivam Tractor, Dhamtari vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Dhamtari, Dhamtari

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 219/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 219/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Shivam Tractor Shivam Tractors, Raipur Road, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493 773 Pan : Aclfs1313H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

claim of the assessee firm. Needless to say, the A.O. shall, in the course of the set-aside proceedings, afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee firm, which shall remain at liberty to substantiate its claim on the basis of fresh documentary evidence. Thus, Ground of Appeal ... direction to re-adjudicate the same. Needless to say, the A.O. shall, in the course of the set-aside proceedings, afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who shall remain at liberty to substantiate the same on the basis of 11 M/s. Shivam Tractor Vs. ITO, Ward

M/S Jalaram Trading Company, Bilaspur(Cg) vs. I.T.O. Ward 1(2), Bilaspur(Cg)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 322/BIL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 322/Rpr/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Jalaram Trading Co. Dayalband, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh-495 001 Pan : Aadfs7259N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

/RPR/2014 CIT(Appeals) shall stand vacated. Needless to say, the A.O. shall, in the course of the set-aside proceedings, afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee firm, which shall remain at liberty to substantiate its claim on the basis of fresh documentary evidence. Thus, Ground