“violation of natural justice”

Neobags Overseas Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.1854/Mum/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

reference of letter VSM/278/F dated 09thFebruary 2024. But without considering the submission, the appeal order was passed on 16/02/2024 which is violation of natural justice and denial of reasonable opportunity. In our considered view, the natural justice is denied to the assessee by not accepting the submission which was made

Veenapani Investments Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalito 13(3)(1), Veenapani Investments Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Private Limted, Mumbai.400020. Flat No. 302, B–Wing, Garden Court Co–Op Society Ltd, Amrutwani Road, Bhayender (W), Mumbai-401101. Pan/Gir No. Aaccv1684Q (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

assessee for cross examination of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and Shri Rakesh Doshi, the ld. CIT(A) observed that there is a clear violation of natural justice. He noted that the copy of the statement of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain as well as his cross examination was not provided ... opportunity to cross examine the deponent, if required by the assessee. In this regard, we note the submission that these amount to gross violation of natural justice and the assessment is vitiated as the assessment is bad in law and requires to be quashed in view of the following decisions

Mr. Anilkumar Manoharlal Aggarwal, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 17(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

submissions. However, the appellate decision was made without considering the assessee's submissions, leading to a denial of a fair opportunity and a violation of natural justice. The assessee was deprived of the chance to present their claim before the 1stappellate authority. We are, therefore, of the opinion that interest

Smt. Sneha Ankit Salecha, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office, Ward, 19(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

sold by the Appellant though specifically demanded by the Appellant and hence the addition deserves to be struck down on the ground of violation of natural justice. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT has erred in making addition of Rs.2.23

Shri Rishikul Brahmacharya Ashram, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: N.A Shri Rishikul Brahmacharya Commissioner Of Income Tax Ashram, (Exemptions), Mumbai Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai – 400 021

hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under: 1) Ground No. 1: Violation of Natural Justice (Trustee) On facts and circumstances, Ld. CIT(Exemptions) has erred in passing the order without providing proper opportunity of hearing to the appellant. Such 2 Shri

Krishna Sheet Processors Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as barred by limitation

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

ld.DR had not made any objection about the submission of the ld.AR before the bench. The order passed by ld.CIT(A) is violation of natural justice andthe reasonable opportunity was denied. Only on the basis of the verification of Form No.35, the appeal was dismissed. We find that there