“speaking order”

Natural JusticeReasoned OrderReasoned Order6,856 judgments

The decision most relied on for speaking order is GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO (259 ITR 19), cited in 1,349 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on speaking order

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO

259 ITR 19 · 2003 · Supreme Court

1,349

citing judgments

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala

245 ITR 360 · 2000 · Supreme Court

361

citing judgments

An order refusing special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, whether speaking or non-speaking, does not attract the doctrine of merger, meaning the order under challenge is not substituted.

M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.

300 ITR 403 · 2008 · Supreme Court

268

citing judgments

Administrative orders must be consistent with the rules of natural justice.

Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT

131 ITR 451 · 1981 · Supreme Court

143

citing judgments

Appellate authorities in income-tax proceedings have the jurisdiction and duty to correct all errors of lower authorities. They must remit matters for proper or fresh adjudication and issue appropriate directions to ensure substantial justice, unless expressly forbidden by statute.

Bayer Material Science Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

382 ITR 333 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

Reassessment orders under Section 147/148 are without jurisdiction and invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to dispose of the assessee's objections to the reopening of assessment through a speaking order, as mandated by the GKN Driveshafts procedure.

Kunhayammed and Others v. State of Kerala

119 STC 505 · Reported

citing judgments

A Supreme Court speaking order dismissing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) has two implications: the statement of law contained therein constitutes a declaration of law under Article 141 of the Constitution, and its findings bind the parties and lower authorities.

PCIT v. Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd.

236 Taxmann 494 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

The incomplete disposal of an assessee's objections by the Assessing Officer makes the reassessment proceedings invalid. The Assessing Officer must dispose of the objections by a speaking order.

Home Finders Housing Ltd. v. ITO

404 ITR 611 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

Non-compliance with the GKN Driveshafts procedure, specifically not passing a speaking order on objections to reassessment before completing the assessment, is a curable procedural irregularity and does not nullify the assessment, particularly if the assessee did not request a speaking order.

Judgments citing speaking order

Hitesh Parmar, Raipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Raipur

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

ITA 758/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Raipur07 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.758/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Hitesh Parmar Prop. Of M/S. Parmar Thread House, Ganesh Ram Nagar, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Ajepp6696A

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Petition)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

highest fact finding authority must be certain enough that the impugned order before it has been passed on merits and is a speaking order where the assessee has also complied during the process of litigation. In case, where the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) itself is ex-parte ... framework of the Act, Ld.CIT(Appeals) is the first appellate authority where an appeal by assessee it would be substantially decided through a speaking order by the Ld.CIT(Appeals). When this part is over and either party is aggrieved second appeal lies before the ITAT. Now if for every

M/S Vishal Packiging, Raipur vs. DCIT-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 635/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.634/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vishal Singh 2Nd Floor, Navbharat Udyog Bhawan, Ring Road No.1, Telibandha, Raipur-492 006 Pan: Ajjps4000Q

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Vishal Singh, Raipur vs. DCIT-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 634/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Nityanand, Sant Kabir Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Basti

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 470/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2016-17 Nityanand V. The Income Tax Officer Vill. & Post Dhamaicha Basti Sant Kabir Nagar (U.P) Tan/Pan:Agzpn3158R (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant By: Shri Vikram Acharya, Aca Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.03.2025, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Was A Teacher Employed With The Government Of U.P. & Earned Salary Income. The Assessee Had Not Filed The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. The Income Tax Department Was In Possession Of Information That The Assessee Had Made Cash Deposits To The Tune Of Rs.2,16,55,000/- In His Bank Account No.144200101001330 Maintained With Corporation Bank During The Year Under Consideration & The Cash Deposited By The Assessee During The Demonetization Period, I.E. From 01.04.2015 To 31.302.016 Was Rs.15,05,000/-. The Assessing Officer (Ao)

For Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

order of CIT(A) NFAC is against the principle of natural justice. 9) That the CIT-(A) NFAC has erred in passing a non- speaking order which is against the law even if the assessed was not represented before it. 10) That the CIT-(A) NFAC has erred in affirming

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Ritu Dhingra, Shakti Vihar, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and cross appeal of the Department are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 862/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: him:- (a) That the assessment order dated 31.03.2023 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153C is bad in law in as much no incriminating material was found suggesting any escapement of income at premises of Sh. Avtar Singh Kochhar. (b) That the assessment order passed is non-est and bad in law in as much the proceedings have not been conducted in the manner prescribed by the Department instructions from time to time which are mandatory for compliance by the Learned Authorities particularly with respect

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, CIT, DR

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153C(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 251(1)(a)

Assessment order is set aside to the file of AO so that submissions of the appellant can be considered by the AO, and a speaking order can be passed based on facts. Therefore, I set-aside the impugned assessment order to the file of AO for making a fresh assessment ... Needless to say, the Ld. CIT(A) shall afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law. 12. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and cross appeal of the Department are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

Ritu Dhingra, Ludhiana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and cross appeal of the Department are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 645/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: him:-

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, CIT, DR

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153C(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 251(1)(a)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala vs. Arun Bhandari, Patiala

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 931/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Krinwant Sahay, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.931/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Arun Bhandari Patiala बनाम/ Vs. Tax, Patiala 10, Dhillon Marg, Model Town, Patiala, Punjab-147001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akupb-0470-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.832/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Arun Bhandari Patiala Acit, Dcit Central Circle बनाम/ Vs. 10, Dhillon Marg, Model Town, Patiala Patiala, Punjab-147001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akupb-0470-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rakesh Cajla (Advocate) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 07 -01-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Krinwant Sahay () The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue & Cross Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-5

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Cajla (Advocate)For Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) Sr. DR

Section 127Section 129Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69C

ground No. 4 is against the rejection of books of account. On this account, the Ld. CIT(A) has given a very detailed and speaking order in the appellate order: 6.5.3 I have considered the reasoning given by the AO in assessment order, submissions & documents submitted by the appellant, facts ... merits and is therefore deleted. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is allowed.” 23. We find that the Ld. CIT Appeal has given a speaking order on this issue and it needs no interference accordingly, Revenue appeal on this issue is dismissed. 24. Appeal on Ground No.4 is against the direction

Arun Bhandari, Patiala vs. ACIT DCIT Central Circle Patiala, Patiala

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 832/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Cajla (Advocate)For Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) Sr. DR

Section 127Section 129Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69C

Mamta Madha vs. Haran Agrawal, Ahmedabadvs.the ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1629/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250

facts by failing to consider that the order u/s. 154 is bad in law as the Ld. AO failed to pass a speaking order and merely stated that the assessee's reply was "not found correct" without assigning reasons or dealing with the evidences submitted.” 3. On perusal

Dadaso Ashok Awati, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Sangli

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

ITA 1480/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Pune07 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Addl.CIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

compliance to the statutory notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal in a detailed speaking order by observing as under: 4 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

Kkvians Vasundhara Foundation Kolhapur, Kolhapur vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 2862/PUN/2024[- NA -]Status: HeardITAT Pune07 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamorekkvians Vasundhara Foundation Cit (Exemption), Pune Kolhapur Vs. Vishwaroop Apartment, Near Karan Nursery, Kolhapur – 416003 Pan: Aaetk4057F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-01-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

statutory notices issued by him, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application for grant of approval u/s 80G of the Act by passing a speaking order. Nothing has been brought before us to take a contrary view than the view taken by the Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, the order

Deepti Social Service Society, Hindupur vs. ITO., Exemption Ward, Tirupati

ITA 920/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 234ASection 69A

explanation of the assessee society regarding the reasons leading to the delay in filing of the appeal and readjudicate the same based on a speaking order. 10. Per contra, Sri S. Arun Kumar, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (for short, “Ld. Sr. DR”), relied upon the orders of the authorities below

ACIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad vs. Vk Warehousing Enterprises, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and

ITA 881/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 68Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

once a specific explanation supported by primary details was placed on record, the CIT(A) was required to adjudicate the same by passing a speaking order. We therefore set aside this issue to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. 12. Coming

Vk Warehousing Enterprises, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 737/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.737/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakfv3288R (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.881/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri P. Dhivahar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

Initiative for Moral and Cultural Training Foundation Telangana, Hyderabad vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1015/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1015/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2024-25) Initiative For Moral & Vs. Commissioner Of Income Cultural Training Tax (Exemptions) Foundation Telangana, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aacti2564F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate T. Chaitanya Kumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. U. Mini Chandran, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Initiative For Moral & Cultural Training Foundation Telangana, (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), (“Ld. Cit(E)”) Dated 19.03.2025 For The A.Y 2024-25. Page 1 Of 6

For Appellant: Advocate T. Chaitanya KumarFor Respondent: : Smt. U. Mini Chandran, CIT

Section 80G

without pointing out any specific deficiency in the documents furnished by the assessee. It was also submitted that the impugned order is a non-speaking order, violating principles of natural justice. The Ld. AR prayed that the matter be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(E) to consider the submissions ... afresh and pass a reasoned and speaking order, after giving the assessee an effective opportunity of being heard. 6. The Ld. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E), stating that the Ld. CIT(E) has jurisdiction to assess the genuineness of activities before granting approval under Section

Sunni Hanfi Mashayaki Momin Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 31(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7185/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Ld.AO shall carry out necessary verification in respect of the evidences furnished by the assesse in accordance with law. The Ld.AO shall pass a speaking order uninfluenced by the earlier orders, which are set aside for this limited purpose. 4.3. It is further made clear that, in the event

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Trimaster Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 955/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2021-22 Assistant Commissioner Of Trimaster Private Limited, Income Tax, Room No.192A, 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, First Floor, C.R. Building, Ito, Vs New Delhi-110020 Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacn0138P Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.119/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.955/Del/2025 ) [Assessment Year: 2021-22 Trimaster Private Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of Income 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Tax, Room No.192A, First Floor, New Delhi-110020 Vs C.R. Building, Ito, Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacn0138P Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Nitini Kumar Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 07.01.2026

Section 10ASection 115BSection 143(3)Section 32Section 32ASection 33ASection 35Section 35ASection 35C

allowance of loss in favour of the assessee, while giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and by passing a speaking order in accordance with law. The assessee shall be required to cooperate and comply with the statutory notices issued by the ld. AO. Page

Baba Healthcare Private Limited vs. ACIT Circle -1, Fbd

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 476/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshbaba Healthcare Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, C/O. Ipso Legal, H-35, 1St Circle-1, Floor, Jangpura Faridabad Extension, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcb7985R Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv Ms. Ssumnagla Saxena, Adv Shri Dishant Sethi, Adv Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

Assessee is given liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, in support of its contentions. The Learned AO is directed to pass a speaking order on examination of all the evidences available and placed on record by the Assessee. The grounds raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Saic Motor Corporation Ltd, China vs. DCIT, International Tax, Gurgaon

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

ITA 1191/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2022-23] Saic Motor Corporation Assistant Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, International Taxation, Gurgaon, Room No.509, Building No.1, Vs Hsiidc Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Tower No.563, Songtao Road, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon, Pilot Free Trade Zone, Sanghai, Haryana-122001 China, Pan-Abfcs0870H Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Shri Kunal Pandey, Adv. Revenue By Shri Rohit Garg, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07.01.2026 Order

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153(1)

assessee not having conducted the offshore sales are contrary to facts. The Ld. DRP was accordingly directed the AO to pass a speaking order insofar as offshore sales by the assessee is conducted in view of the findings of the Panel and the discussion of the Panel shall also ... findings that the assessee did not conduct offshore sales are contrary to the facts. The AO is directed to issue a speaking order reflecting the Panel's findings. In view of the direction of the Hon'ble Panel, taking into consideration the Hon'ble Panel's detailed examination and findings

Hutatma Madhyavarti Sahakari Grahak Bhandar Maryadit Walwa, Sangli vs. ITO Ward - 5, Sangli

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

ITA 1834/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1834/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 80P(2)(d)

necessary adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee in the set aside proceedings and pass a speaking order as contemplated 4 Hutatma Madhyavarti Sahakari Grahak Bhandar Maryadit Walwa u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact