← 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

Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Patna vs. Assessment Unit, Patna

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 434/PAT/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 80P

under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was contended that adequate opportunity of being heard was not granted, and the appeal was disposed of without proper appreciation of facts. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment. I.T.A. Nos.429to ... order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide the issue afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, ITA No. 429/Patna/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. ITA No. 430/Patna/2025 relates to penalty under Section 270A

Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Patna vs. Assessment Unit, Patna

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 431/PAT/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 80P

under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was contended that adequate opportunity of being heard was not granted, and the appeal was disposed of without proper appreciation of facts. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment. I.T.A. Nos.429to ... order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide the issue afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, ITA No. 429/Patna/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. ITA No. 430/Patna/2025 relates to penalty under Section 270A

Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Patna vs. Assessment Unit, Patna

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 430/PAT/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 80P

under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was contended that adequate opportunity of being heard was not granted, and the appeal was disposed of without proper appreciation of facts. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment. I.T.A. Nos.429to ... order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide the issue afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, ITA No. 429/Patna/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. ITA No. 430/Patna/2025 relates to penalty under Section 270A

Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Limited, Patna vs. Assessment Unit, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the ITA Nos

ITA 429/PAT/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.429To 434/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Vaishal Patliputra Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd……………………………...………………. …………………....Appellant Feeder Balancing Dairy, Phulwarishariff, Patna, Bihar – 801505. [Pan: Aaaav8463B] Vs. Assessment Unit, Delhi.…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nishan Maitin, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.04.2025 Passed By The Cit(A)-Patna U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). Since All The Above Appeals Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee, Involve Common Facts & Arise Out Of Related Assessment & Penalty Proceedings, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. There Are Delays In Filing Of The Appeals, As Under:

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 80P

under section 80P of the Act. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was contended that adequate opportunity of being heard was not granted, and the appeal was disposed of without proper appreciation of facts. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment. I.T.A. Nos.429to ... order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer, with a direction to decide the issue afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, ITA No. 429/Patna/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. ITA No. 430/Patna/2025 relates to penalty under Section 270A

Bhola Prasad, Gaya vs. Income Tax Officer, Gaya

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

ITA 339/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.339/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bhola Prasad..………………….………………. …………………....Appellant Manpur Ptwatoli Durga Asthan, Gaya, Bihar-823001.. [Pan: Auzpp5136D] Vs. Ito, Gaya…………..………..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Jitendra Kr. Sinha, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.05.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Textile. For The Assessment Year 2017–18, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹3,10,520. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass On Account Of High-Value Cash Deposits During The Demonetisation Period, As Reported Through Third-Party Information. Notices Under Section 143(2) Followed By Notices Under Section 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Were Issued. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, It Was Noticed That Cash Deposits Aggregating To ₹97,64,000, Predominantly In

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 44ASection 69

Motilal, then the corresponding additions shall be deleted in the hands of the present assessee, doing so the assessee shall be afforded adequate opportunity of being heard. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 9th January, 2026. [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma

Birju Kumar, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 4 (1), Patna

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

ITA 296/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.296/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Birju Kumar…………………….………………. …………………....Appellant Daulatpur Masaurhi, Patna, Bihar- 804452.. [Pan: Daspk0454F] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(1), Patna………..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.04.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee’S Case Was Reopened By Issuance Of Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, On The Basis Of Information Received Through Form 26As / Statement Of Specified Financial Transactions (Sft) Under Section 285Ba(1), Indicating Cash Withdrawals Amounting To ₹1,07,38,557 During The Relevant Previous Year. The Assessee Did Not File Return Of Income In Response To The Notice Under Section 148. Thereafter, Notices Under Sections 142(1) & 143(2) Were Issued On Various Dates. Despite Issuance Of Statutory Notices, The Assessee Failed To Comply & Did Not

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 285B

evidences in support of his claims and the Ld. CIT(A) shall adjudicate the issues afresh in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is made clear that in case the assessee again fails to comply, the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass

Rajesh Kumar Sah, Muzaffarpur vs. ITO, Ward- 1 (1), Muzaffarpur

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

ITA 165/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.165/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar Sah.………….………………. …………………....Appellant C/O Harilal Prasad Navanagar, Nijamat, Karnowl, Sahebgunj, Muzaffarpur-843125. Bihar.. [Pan: Efwpk4178C] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Muzaffarpur…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri G. P. Tulsiyan, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 06, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.02.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Did Not File His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018–19. Consequently, Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act Was Issued. However, Even In Response To The Notice Under Section 148, The Assessee Failed To File The Return Of Income. During The Reassessment Proceedings, On Verification Of Bank Accounts, The Assessing Officer Noticed Cash Deposits Aggregating To ₹3,26,54,960, Which Were Treated As Unexplained Money Under Section

Section 148Section 250

Vijay Prasad by examine bank statements, fund flow, and supporting documents and pass a fresh order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to appear before the Assessing Officer and substantiate his claim by filing all relevant supporting documents

Yogesh Sood, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Bhopal

In the result we are of the considered opinion that the

ITA 424/IND/2025[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Indore09 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 69C

This shows that you are not interested in pursuing your present appeal. In view of the above, you are hereby granted a final opportunity of being heard to furnish your written submission on or before 18.12.2024, otherwise your present appeal shall be decided as per the material available on record

ACIT-1(1), Indore vs. Kriti Nutrients Limited, Indore

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 780/IND/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 246ASection 250Section 253

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M

Dharti Madrid County LLP, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2127/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69C

this appeal: - “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing an Ex Parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Hence the same being against the principles of natural justice and equity requires to be quashed. 2. The learned Commissioner

Kumar Properties and Real Estate Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14, Pune

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

ITA 2798/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 270A

file of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the issue afresh and in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes

Kishore Kashinath Koli, Panvel vs. CIT(A), Delhi

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

ITA 2179/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Mrs. Naina ChaurasiaFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

NFAC with a direction to condone the delay and decide the issue on merit as per fact and law 5 after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to make his submissions, if any, on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment

Yadiki Pacs, Anantapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anantapur

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

ITA 926/HYD/2025[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026

Bench: the Andhra Pradesh High Court against the Order of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad rejecting the appellant's application filed u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act to condone the delay in filing the Income Tax Return for the subject AY 2019-20 is pending for disposal as on date. 7. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had erred in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act in consequence to the above." 3

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 80ASection 80P

compliance with the provisions of Section 80AC of the Act without providing the appellant an opportunity of being heard against the same which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 6. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had failed to appreciate the fact that

Srirangarao Nadipallly, Karimnagar vs. ACIT., Circle-1, Karimnagar

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

ITA 844/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.844/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Srirangarao Nadipally Vs. Assistant Commissioner Karimnagar Of Income Tax Pan:Acbpn3816E Circle-1, Karimnagar (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Adv. Kvssn Kumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sankar Pandi P - Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Srirangarao Nadipally (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 24.03.2025 For The A.Y 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Adv. KVSSN KumarFor Respondent: Sankar Pandi P - Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

with a direction to re-adjudicate the claim of agricultural income of Rs.9,00,000/- afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to produce necessary documentary evidence before the Ld. AO in support of his claim of agricultural income, including ... other relevant material. The Ld. AO shall verify the same and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Page 13 of 14 ITA No 844 of 2025 Srirangarao Nadipally 16. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Yadagiri Gurram, Nalgonda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nalgonda

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

ITA 1214/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी. सं / Ita No.1214/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Yadagiri Gurram Nalgonda Pan:Bdrpg9128G (Appellant) Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Nalgonda (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Adv. Dayakar राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Madhukar Aves, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Yadagiri Gurram, (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 30.05.2025 For The A.Y 2017-18.

For Appellant: Adv. DayakarFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar AVES, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 271ASection 271FSection 69A

shall examine the evidence so produced and decide the issue afresh, in accordance with law, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 14. Regarding past savings of Rs.2,00,000/-, we find that the assessee has declared incomes of Rs.17,52,700/- in AY 2014– 15, Rs.4

Jain Social Group Hyderabad Charitable Foundation Trust, Hyderabad vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for

ITA 1173/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1173/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: Sri Jasraj R ShrishrimalFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)

ignoring significant amount applied for charitable activities. 6. The order passed by Ld. CIT(E) rejecting application is invalid without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard though it is mandatorily required as envisaged in the section 12AB(b)(ii) (item B). 7. The Ld. CIT(E) ought to have ... grant registration. The petitioner may file its response to that objection within one month from today. The respondent shall thereafter afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass fresh orders taking into account the contentions of the petitioner. Since the matter is remitted, I am not expressing

Mumtaz Ali Mohd, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1260/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1260/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15) Mumtaz Ali Mohd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-8(1), Pan: Abppm6593E Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vonoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 09/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 09/01/2024, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 12/05/2023 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Vonoth Kannan
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

observations, set aside the matter to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to readjudicate the appeal after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Also, we may herein observe that the CIT(A) shall in the course of the set 11 Mumtaz Ali Mohd

Prime Omkar K K Consortium, Mumbai City vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 25 (3) (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6541/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Prusethprime Omkar K K Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(3)(1) Consortium Income Tax Office, Kautilya Bhavan, Building No. 1, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Sukhadwala, 36 Dhanji Mumbai -400051. Street, Mumbai-400003. Pan/Gir No: Aabap7015N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

deleted in appeal. 3. Ground no. 3:- Both the lower authorities erred in passing their respective orders without granting the Appellant an adequate opportunity of being heard. The orders passed by them are in contravention of the principles of natural justice and require to be set right in this appeal ... aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication after granting adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee directed to be vigilant and diligent and file all the necessary details as may be required

Jankalyan Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Mar Shahapur, Shahapur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Kalyan

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

ITA 6301/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 139Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(c)

declared and taxes paid under the Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016, and thereafter decide the issue afresh in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 13. The learned Departmental Representative raised no objection to the above course of action. 14. The issues arising ... under consideration and other relevant assessment years. The Assessing Officer shall thereafter decide the matter afresh in accordance with law, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 15. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court

Reliable Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1), Thane

ITA 4812/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: the Learned CIT(A). However, the

For Appellant: Ms. Sakina AmreliwalaFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri
Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

raised in the appeal which reads as under: “7. The learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in dismissing assessee’s appeal without affording adequate opportunity of being heard and also without considering assessee’s submissions.” 5. The Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee took us through the impugned order passed ... adjudicate afresh the appeal filed by the Assessee along with applications (if any) as per law after granting the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, Ground No.7 raised by the Assessee is allowed and all the other grounds raised by the Assessee are dismissed as having rendered infructuous