← 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

Dmsons Metal Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl Commissioner of Income Tax -Range-6(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 761/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JhaFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)

issue to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication. Needless to mention that no order shall be passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue is set aside and grounds no.3

Rim Impex, Mumbai vs. ITO-25(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1832/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Ld. Cit(A). M/S. Rim Impex 3. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & The Notice Issued To The Assessee Has Been Returned Back Unserved. Since The Ld.Cit(A) Has Passed Ex-Parte Order In Both The Years, Without Hearing The Assessee, We Proceed To Dispose Of Both The Appeals Ex-Parte, Without The Presence Of The Assessee.

both the years under consideration and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the ld. CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeals. 5. In the result

Rim Impex, Mumbai vs. ITO-25(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1831/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Ld. Cit(A). M/S. Rim Impex 3. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & The Notice Issued To The Assessee Has Been Returned Back Unserved. Since The Ld.Cit(A) Has Passed Ex-Parte Order In Both The Years, Without Hearing The Assessee, We Proceed To Dispose Of Both The Appeals Ex-Parte, Without The Presence Of The Assessee.

both the years under consideration and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the ld. CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeals. 5. In the result

Shree Vignahara Trilokpati Parshwanath Jain Shw Tirth Trust, Rajsamand vs. CIT(Exemption), Jaipur

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

ITA 151/JODH/2023[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Aug 2023AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteshreevignaharatrilokpati Vs. Cit (E), Jaipur Parshwanath Jain Shw Kailash Height, Tirth Trust, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Kumhar Nada N.H. 8, Jaipur-302015, Bhim,Rajsamand303921, Rajasthan. Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Abcts1256M Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Smt.Alka Rajvanshi Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur Passed U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax (Act), 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt.Alka Rajvanshi Jain
Section 12A

dissolution clause in the deed 3. Respected CIT exemption has erred in fact and in law in not allowing the appellant reasonable opportunity of being heard before passing the order of rejection of application of registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act1961 4. The appellant prays to preserve

Hemendra Gangawat, Udaipur vs. ITO, Ward-TDS, Udaipur

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

ITA 145/JODH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT - DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

206C(6)/206C(6A)/206C(7) of the IT Act, 1961, whereas while completing the assessment, the AO has not provided the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to explain his case, therefore the action of the Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi is unwarranted, against the principles

Hemendra Gangawat, Udaipur vs. ITO, Ward-TDS, Udaipur

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

ITA 144/JODH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT - DR
Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 206C(7)

206C(6)/206C(6A)/206C(7) of the IT Act, 1961, whereas while completing the assessment, the AO has not provided the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to explain his case, therefore the action of the Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi is unwarranted, against the principles

Sahid Khan, Panipat vs. ITO, Ward-4, Panipat

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 1859/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 144Section 147Section 148

circumstances of the case, the Id CIT(A), NFAC, 2 Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal of appellant without giving the proper opportunity of being heard. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law in confirming

Nisschal Jain, Noida vs. ITO Ward - 21(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 558/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2011-12
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154

taken in this appeal are as under: “1. Action of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in passing ex- parte order without giving proper opportunity of being heard is unjust, illegal, arbitrary and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Action of CIT(A) in approving Page ... Assessee's Representative canvassing the argument on Ground No.1, submitted that the CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the Assessee which is unjust, illegal, arbitrary and against to natural justice. Therefore, prayed for restoring the matter to the file

S R Educational Society, Rewari vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh

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

ITA 962/DEL/2020[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.”

Section 12A

Educational Society vs. CIT(E) directed to appear and cooperate with the proceedings. The Ld. CIT(E) is also directed to provide opportunity of being heard to the appellant and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Surjit Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 41(1), New Delhi

ITA 7983/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Making An Addition Of Rs.35,00,000/- In The Hands Of The Appellant. 4. That An Addition/Sustain Of Rs.35,00,000/- Is Absolute Not Related To Addition Held By A.O.As It Was Related To Rent & The Learned A.O. After Discussing The Total Rent Received Assessed The Assessee Accordingly.

Section 251(2)Section 68

Bank account of the assessee’ to the file of the A.O. with a direction to provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and decide afresh. Ordered accordingly. Order pronounced in open Court on 08th August, 2023 (N.K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 08/08/2023 Pk/R.N, Sr. Ps Page

Ee Res Division Rajnandgaon, Rajnandgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 257/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: None (written submission)
Section 200ASection 234E

appeal were related to different quarters of the year in respect of Form 24 and Form 26. Had he given an opportunity of being heard the facts would have been brought to his notice by the appellant and the situation of dismissal of the appeals without going into the matter

Ee Res Division Rajnandgaon, Rajnandgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 256/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: None (written submission)
Section 200ASection 234E

appeal were related to different quarters of the year in respect of Form 24 and Form 26. Had he given an opportunity of being heard the facts would have been brought to his notice by the appellant and the situation of dismissal of the appeals without going into the matter

Ee Res Division Rajnandgaon, Rajnandgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 255/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: None (written submission)
Section 200ASection 234E

appeal were related to different quarters of the year in respect of Form 24 and Form 26. Had he given an opportunity of being heard the facts would have been brought to his notice by the appellant and the situation of dismissal of the appeals without going into the matter

Shri Dipesh Sureshbhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Vapi

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

ITA 251/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Surat08 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.251/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Virtual Hearing) Dipesh Sureshbhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, Ward-1, 834/2, Next To Dr. Gulab Clinic, Surat Silvassa "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ayypp9552E (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Appellant By Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/08/2023

Section 147Section 250(6)

note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter ... file of Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication and pass a ITA.251/SRT/2023/AY.2015-16 Shri Dipesh Sureshbhai Patel speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Ramesh Kumar Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 553/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Akshay JainFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. Needless to mention that no order shall be passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to both parties. Further, both parties shall be at liberty to raise all the submissions in respect of the jurisdiction under section

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 123/CTK/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.120 To 123/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014 12 To 2014-15 Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Vs. Income Ta Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chandradeipur, Chandradeipur, Salepur, Salepur, 1(1), Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Adopb 5206 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Ranjan Dash Dash, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/0 /08/2023 O R D E R These Are These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Of The The Ld Ld Cit(A) Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi All Dated10.01.2023 10.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104858788161) 23/104858788161) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 C/S/250/2022-23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011 23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011- 12 To 2014-15, Respectively. 15, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 80C

where the Fixed Deposit of on 14.5.2002 having the date of maturity as 13.5.2005 is located. Section 69 would be applicable. Opportunity of Being Heard under section 59 The imperative Condition Before Making Addition :- Since the words used in the Section 69 are "assessee offers no explanation about the nature ... explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory'' conspicuously indicates that there must be an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. P a g e 4 | 12 ITA Nos.120 to 123/CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2014-15 Therefore the appellant draws

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 122/CTK/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.120 To 123/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014 12 To 2014-15 Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Vs. Income Ta Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chandradeipur, Chandradeipur, Salepur, Salepur, 1(1), Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Adopb 5206 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Ranjan Dash Dash, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/0 /08/2023 O R D E R These Are These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Of The The Ld Ld Cit(A) Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi All Dated10.01.2023 10.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104858788161) 23/104858788161) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 C/S/250/2022-23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011 23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011- 12 To 2014-15, Respectively. 15, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 80C

where the Fixed Deposit of on 14.5.2002 having the date of maturity as 13.5.2005 is located. Section 69 would be applicable. Opportunity of Being Heard under section 59 The imperative Condition Before Making Addition :- Since the words used in the Section 69 are "assessee offers no explanation about the nature ... explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory'' conspicuously indicates that there must be an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. P a g e 4 | 12 ITA Nos.120 to 123/CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2014-15 Therefore the appellant draws

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 121/CTK/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.120 To 123/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014 12 To 2014-15 Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Vs. Income Ta Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chandradeipur, Chandradeipur, Salepur, Salepur, 1(1), Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Adopb 5206 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Ranjan Dash Dash, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/0 /08/2023 O R D E R These Are These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Of The The Ld Ld Cit(A) Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi All Dated10.01.2023 10.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104858788161) 23/104858788161) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 C/S/250/2022-23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011 23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011- 12 To 2014-15, Respectively. 15, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 80C

where the Fixed Deposit of on 14.5.2002 having the date of maturity as 13.5.2005 is located. Section 69 would be applicable. Opportunity of Being Heard under section 59 The imperative Condition Before Making Addition :- Since the words used in the Section 69 are "assessee offers no explanation about the nature ... explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory'' conspicuously indicates that there must be an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. P a g e 4 | 12 ITA Nos.120 to 123/CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2014-15 Therefore the appellant draws

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 120/CTK/2023[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.120 To 123/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014 12 To 2014-15 Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Vs. Income Ta Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chandradeipur, Chandradeipur, Salepur, Salepur, 1(1), Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Adopb 5206 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Ranjan Dash Dash, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/0 /08/2023 O R D E R These Are These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Of The The Ld Ld Cit(A) Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi All Dated10.01.2023 10.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104858788161) 23/104858788161) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 C/S/250/2022-23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011 23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011- 12 To 2014-15, Respectively. 15, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 80C

where the Fixed Deposit of on 14.5.2002 having the date of maturity as 13.5.2005 is located. Section 69 would be applicable. Opportunity of Being Heard under section 59 The imperative Condition Before Making Addition :- Since the words used in the Section 69 are "assessee offers no explanation about the nature ... explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory'' conspicuously indicates that there must be an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. P a g e 4 | 12 ITA Nos.120 to 123/CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2014-15 Therefore the appellant draws

Rajouri Development Authority, Rajouri vs. Income Tax Officer ( TDS), Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 186/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Mohit Kumar Nigam, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234ESection 246A

craves to leave to add or amend any ground of appeal.” 3. None appeared for the assesse in spite of being granted sufficient opportunity of being heard. However, considering the small issue, we decided to hear the Ld. DR and adjudicate the appeal. The Assessing Officer has rejected rectification application