← All Phrases

“violation of natural justice”

Natural JusticeAudi Alteram PartemAudi Alteram Partem881 judgments

The decision most relied on for violation of natural justice is Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (125 ITR 713), cited in 962 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on violation of natural justice

Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT
125 ITR 713 · 1980 · Supreme Court
962
citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to be confronted with evidence used against them and to an opportunity for cross-examination, especially when that evidence is from a third party or a retracted statement. Failure to provide such an opportunity violates the principles of natural justice.

CIT v. Ashwani Gupta
322 ITR 396 · 2010 · High Court
262
citing judgments

Proceedings become fatal if principles of natural justice are violated, such as when seized material is not provided to the assessee or cross-examination of a person whose statement the Assessing Officer relies upon is denied.

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT
317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Orders that are inordinately delayed are liable to be recalled and heard afresh, and the Appellate Tribunal President should frame guidelines for timely disposal of appeals.

Vijay Shrinivasrao Kulkarni v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
171 Taxmann.com 696 · 2025 · High Court
200
citing judgments

The ITAT fails to uphold natural justice when it doesn't address an infirmity regarding an assessee being denied a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the matter ex-parte.

H.R. Mehta v. ACIT
387 ITR 561 · 2016 · High Court
175
citing judgments

An assessment order is unsustainable if the Assessing Officer denies the assessee the opportunity to cross-examine deponents whose statements are relied upon or fails to provide the material used against them, as this violates principles of natural justice.

H.R. Mehta v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai
72 Taxmann.com 110 · 2016 · High Court
125
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must provide the assessee with all material relied upon for an addition or disallowance and an opportunity to cross-examine deponents or witnesses whose statements form the basis of the assessment. Failure to provide such an opportunity violates natural justice and invalidates the addition or disallowance.

Andaman Timber Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise
15 SCC 785 · 2016 · Supreme Court
91
citing judgments

An assessment order is invalid if it relies on statements of third-party witnesses without granting the assessee the opportunity to cross-examine them, as this constitutes a fundamental breach of natural justice. No addition can be sustained if based solely on un-cross-examined statements.

Additional Income-tax Officer v. Ponkunnam Traders
102 ITR 366 · 1976 · High Court
66
citing judgments

When an Income-tax Officer relies on third-party evidence to make an addition to an assessee's income, the assessee must be given an opportunity to cross-examine those parties. Failure to provide this opportunity violates natural justice and invalidates the addition.

Judgments citing violation of natural justice

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Nidhi Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2124/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 234ASection 271ASection 68Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. C. M. Garg, Judicial Member Dr. B

Ankit Sharma, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1842/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 234ASection 271ASection 68Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. C. M. Garg, Judicial Member Dr. B

Rosoboronservice (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground number 2 – 6 [ except 4, of the appeal are restored to the file of the learned AO/TPO to benchmark the international transaction afresh by selecting first the A

ITA 7255/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Deputy Commissioner Of Rosoboronservice (India) Limited Income Tax-15(3)(1) R-700, Ttc Industrial Estate, Room No. 473, Aayakar P.O. Ghansoli, Midc Rabale, Vs. Navi Mumbai- 400701 Bhawan, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcr0040B Assessee By : Mr. Gaurav Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2023

For Appellant: Mr. Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92(3)Section 92C

incorrect margin computations. 3.4. The learned AO/ DRP/ TPO erred in calculating the margin of the Appellant in case of service segment.” 4. Violation of Natural Justice: The learned AO/ DRP/ TPO erred in not providing complete information/benchmarking analysis 4.1. The learned AO/ DRP/ TPO has erred in violating

Best Auto Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1753/DEL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Satish Khosla, Adv
Section 154

Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred in relying upon the report of the Departmental Valuation Cell, which suffers from the vice of a violation of natural justice. 9. On careful consideration of said application of assessee, we note that the assessee seeks to challenge the acceptability of report of Departmental

Best Auto Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 4(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3052/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Satish Khosla, Adv
Section 154

Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred in relying upon the report of the Departmental Valuation Cell, which suffers from the vice of a violation of natural justice. 9. On careful consideration of said application of assessee, we note that the assessee seeks to challenge the acceptability of report of Departmental

Nav Prerna Society, Rewari vs. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

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

ITA 1647/DEL/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : Nil] Nav Prerna Society, Vs Cit(Exemption), Radha Swami Road, Sector-3, Chandigarh. Huda, Rewari, Haryana-123401. Pan-Aaatn9825G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Jatin Saini, Ca Respondent By Ms. Samita Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27.09.2023

Section 80GSection 80G(5)

only on E-Filling portal without communicating through registered E-Mail, SMS on registered mobile and /or postal service which is gross violation of natural justice. 3. That in any view of the facts and circumstances of the case of the appellant Charitable Trust it is entitled for grant

Sheelaben D. Italia, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(3)(4), Surat

In the result grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 414/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Sheelaben D. Italia, I.T.O., 10, Vaibhav Bunglow, City Ward-2(3)(4), Vs. Gymkhana Road, Piplod, Surat. Surat. Pan No. Aacpi 0617 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)

number was received, thus no compliance could be made. No reasonable and proper opportunity to represent her case was provided which resulted in violation of natural justice. The programming of computerized system of CPC which is based on data, cannot consider allowability, therefore, enhancement of income was made merely

Shri Abdul Rashid Butt, Kishtwar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-I, Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 144/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 68

13th April 2021. So, the assessment order was passed well in advance before due date of filing the reply in hearing which is violation of natural justice. The ld. AR respectfully relied on the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Antony Alphonse Kevin ... date of the filing documents the assessment order was passed on dated 13th April 2021. It is revealed that there is violation of natural justice and the ld. AO acted beyond the jurisdiction. We respectfully relied on the order of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Antony

Control Risks India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 6(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Upvan Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40

substantive grounds raised by the assessee whereby the assessee seeks to impugn the order of the CIT(A) towards alleged violation of natural justice as disposal of first appellate order without admitting additional evidences placed before CIT(A) on consideration of technical infirmities. 10 With reference to the non admission

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 297/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.297/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Jayantibhai Virjibhai Babariya, Income-Tax, Circle-2, Surat, Vs. K-801, River View Heights, Room No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pedar Road, Mota Varachha, Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- Surat-394101 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpb 0820 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwin K Parekh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69

made in absence of providing opportunity of cross examinations of persons, whose statement has been relied upon for making the additions is in violation of natural justice, hence cannot be sustained. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Krishnachand Chelaram ... Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 0241 (SC) has held that additions without providing the opportunity of cross examination is in violation of natural justice. We also note that not allowing the assessee to cross examine the witness by the adjudicating authority though the statements of those witness were

Amit Harit, Meerut vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Noida

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

ITA 1045/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediaamit Harit Vs. Dcit G-15/6, Shastri Nagar, Meerut International Taxation Uttar Pradesh – 250 004 Noida Pan No. Abzph 9529 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144

however rejected the plea of the assessee for admission of additional evidences filed and denied any relief by a summery order in violation of natural justice. 5. The Learned Counsel thus points out that, in effect, no realistic opportunity was made available to the assessee resulting in ex parte order

Anu Kumar, Patna vs. Deputy/ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 60/PAT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR
Section 144BSection 144B(6)(vii)Section 144B(7)(vii)Section 250

opportunity to file written submission as also without allowing opportunity of personal hearing and thus, the present order is a blatant example of violation of natural justice besides violating the Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 mandatory provisions contained in section 250(6B) to (6D) inserted by Finance ... blatantly violated by the Ld. CIT(A). The Apex Court in its judgments (relevant portion quoted below) have severely condemned the practice of violation of natural justice by not allowing proper and adequate opportunity of being heard Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 8. Similarly an opportunity

Anu Kumar, Patna vs. Deputy/ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 59/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR
Section 144BSection 144B(6)(vii)Section 144B(7)(vii)Section 250

opportunity to file written submission as also without allowing opportunity of personal hearing and thus, the present order is a blatant example of violation of natural justice besides violating the Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 mandatory provisions contained in section 250(6B) to (6D) inserted by Finance ... blatantly violated by the Ld. CIT(A). The Apex Court in its judgments (relevant portion quoted below) have severely condemned the practice of violation of natural justice by not allowing proper and adequate opportunity of being heard Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 8. Similarly an opportunity

Anu Kumar, Patna vs. Deputy/ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 58/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR
Section 144BSection 144B(6)(vii)Section 144B(7)(vii)Section 250

opportunity to file written submission as also without allowing opportunity of personal hearing and thus, the present order is a blatant example of violation of natural justice besides violating the Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 mandatory provisions contained in section 250(6B) to (6D) inserted by Finance ... blatantly violated by the Ld. CIT(A). The Apex Court in its judgments (relevant portion quoted below) have severely condemned the practice of violation of natural justice by not allowing proper and adequate opportunity of being heard Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 8. Similarly an opportunity

Anu Kumar, Patna vs. Deputy/ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 57/PAT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR
Section 144BSection 144B(6)(vii)Section 144B(7)(vii)Section 250

opportunity to file written submission as also without allowing opportunity of personal hearing and thus, the present order is a blatant example of violation of natural justice besides violating the Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 mandatory provisions contained in section 250(6B) to (6D) inserted by Finance ... blatantly violated by the Ld. CIT(A). The Apex Court in its judgments (relevant portion quoted below) have severely condemned the practice of violation of natural justice by not allowing proper and adequate opportunity of being heard Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 8. Similarly an opportunity

Anu Kumar, Patna vs. Deputy/ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 55/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR
Section 144BSection 144B(6)(vii)Section 144B(7)(vii)Section 250

opportunity to file written submission as also without allowing opportunity of personal hearing and thus, the present order is a blatant example of violation of natural justice besides violating the Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 mandatory provisions contained in section 250(6B) to (6D) inserted by Finance ... blatantly violated by the Ld. CIT(A). The Apex Court in its judgments (relevant portion quoted below) have severely condemned the practice of violation of natural justice by not allowing proper and adequate opportunity of being heard Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 8. Similarly an opportunity

Anu Kumar, Patna vs. Deputy/ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 54/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR
Section 144BSection 144B(6)(vii)Section 144B(7)(vii)Section 250

opportunity to file written submission as also without allowing opportunity of personal hearing and thus, the present order is a blatant example of violation of natural justice besides violating the Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 mandatory provisions contained in section 250(6B) to (6D) inserted by Finance ... blatantly violated by the Ld. CIT(A). The Apex Court in its judgments (relevant portion quoted below) have severely condemned the practice of violation of natural justice by not allowing proper and adequate opportunity of being heard Anu Kumar, AYs: 2013-14 to 2019-20 8. Similarly an opportunity

Sitaram Narayandas Patel (Deceased) by His Legal Heir Ashok S Patel, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 22(3) at Present Jurisdiction With ACIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 901/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 901/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 900/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बिधम/ Sitaram Narayandas Patel Acit, Circle-22(3) (Deceased) By His Legal Heir At Present Jurisdiction With Vs. Ashok Patel Acit, Circle-22(1) Plot No. 91, Ambey Vila, Piramal Chamber Lalbaug, Next To Grant Hyatt, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Vakola Bridge, Shivaji Nagar, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400055. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpp6860D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri Tambe Revenue By: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 08.02.2023 For Ay. 2014-15 & Order Dated 09.02.2023 For Ay. 2015-16. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee For Ay 2014-15, Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit (A) Confirming The Action Of The Ao Disallowing An Amount Of Rs.1,00,00,000/- [Donations Of Rs.75 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Sahara Health & Education Society (Hereinafter “M/S. Sahara Health”) & Rs.25 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Tulsi Gramudyog Seva

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri TambeFor Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. AR)
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 35A

this case, so the material could not have been used against the assessee. Thus the Ld AR contented that there was violation of natural justice. And also pointed out that AO during assessment proceedings did not give proper opportunity to assessee . In this context, it is noted that ... action of AO itself shows that assessee was not given proper opportunity to rebut the adverse material collected by him. Since there is violation of natural justice, we are inclined to set aside the assessment order for AY. 2014-15 and further take note of the fact that

Sitaram Narayandas Patel(Deceased) by His Legal Heir Ashok S. Patel, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 22(3) at Present Jurisdiction With ACIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 900/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 901/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 900/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) बिधम/ Sitaram Narayandas Patel Acit, Circle-22(3) (Deceased) By His Legal Heir At Present Jurisdiction With Vs. Ashok Patel Acit, Circle-22(1) Plot No. 91, Ambey Vila, Piramal Chamber Lalbaug, Next To Grant Hyatt, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Vakola Bridge, Shivaji Nagar, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400055. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpp6860D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri Tambe Revenue By: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 08.02.2023 For Ay. 2014-15 & Order Dated 09.02.2023 For Ay. 2015-16. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee For Ay 2014-15, Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit (A) Confirming The Action Of The Ao Disallowing An Amount Of Rs.1,00,00,000/- [Donations Of Rs.75 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Sahara Health & Education Society (Hereinafter “M/S. Sahara Health”) & Rs.25 Lakhs Paid To M/S. Tulsi Gramudyog Seva

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Madhuri TambeFor Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad (Sr. AR)
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 35A

this case, so the material could not have been used against the assessee. Thus the Ld AR contented that there was violation of natural justice. And also pointed out that AO during assessment proceedings did not give proper opportunity to assessee . In this context, it is noted that ... action of AO itself shows that assessee was not given proper opportunity to rebut the adverse material collected by him. Since there is violation of natural justice, we are inclined to set aside the assessment order for AY. 2014-15 and further take note of the fact that

Aman Exports International, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 147/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Tatiwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) &
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)

assessee must he allowed to cross-examine him. The range of natural justice is wide and whether or not there has been violation of natural justice would depend on the facts and circumstances of the case." Further reliance is placed upon the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Delhi