Search: disallowance | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

95 results for “disallowance”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,804 Delhi5,387 Bangalore2,039 Chennai1,826 Kolkata1,467 Ahmedabad997 Jaipur682 Hyderabad599 Pune543 Surat428 Karnataka360 Raipur321 Indore291 Chandigarh279 Lucknow240 Rajkot227 Visakhapatnam197 Amritsar193 Cochin164 Cuttack163 Agra140 Nagpur136 Telangana113 Calcutta97 Panaji95 Allahabad88 Jodhpur85 Patna74 Guwahati69 Dehradun51 Jabalpur49 SC36 Ranchi32 Varanasi31 Kerala31 Punjab & Haryana19 Orissa11 Rajasthan8 Himachal Pradesh4 Andhra Pradesh1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 J&K1 Gauhati1 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)41 Deduction41 Condonation of Delay41 Section 80P(2)(a)39 Disallowance38 Natural Justice37 Addition to Income29 Section 80P22 Section 80P(4)18 Section 80P(2)(d)

SONALI MAHENDRA NAIK GAUNEKAR,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 313/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 263Section 50C

natural justice and the addition sustained by the NFAC is liable to be deleted. 2. ⁠The NFAC erred in confirming the addition/ disallowance

Showing 1–20 of 95 · Page 1 of 5

15

SHRI BEERESHWAR CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD MADABHAVI,BELAGAVI vs. ITO WARD-2, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI

ITA 487/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 487/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Mr Shivanand Halbhavi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 80P(2)

disallowed and total income was assessee accordingly by an order dt. 05/09/2022 framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act. ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 7 Shri Beereshwar Co-op. Credit Society Ltd. Vs ITO ITA Nos.487/PAN/2025 AY: 2020-21 3.2 Consequent to aforestated assessment, the Ld. NFeAC initiated penal proceedings u/s 270A by service of notice dt. 30/12/2022

SALGAOCAR MINING INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD,PANAJI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, MARGAO

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 132/PAN/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Jan 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2006-2007 M/S Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd. Salgaonkar Bhava, Altino, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan: Aabcs8862N . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/01/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Impugns The Order Dt. 20/03/2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals-2), Panaji [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Dealt With Order Dt. 20/12/2011 Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By Dcit, Circle-1, Margao Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2006-07.[‘Ay’]

For Appellant: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

disallowance of excess depreciation of 1,82,643/- . 2.4 Aggrieved assessee company preferred an appeal u/s 246A r.w.s. 249 of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) on 25/01/2012 which was instituted for first appellate adjudication vide Appeal No : CIT(A)/PNJ/10310/2019-20 and dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) by an order dt. 17/03/2025. ITAT-Panaji Page

DAMODAR MANGALJI & COMPANY LIMITED,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 35/PAN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 034 & 035/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2014-15 Damodar Mangalji & Company Ltd. Damodar Niwas, 1St Floor, Mc Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan : Aaacd6880G . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Jt./Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1/Circle-1(1), Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Adv Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr M Satish [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/12/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Twin Appeals Of Assessee Instituted U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Are Directed Against Separate Din & Order 1070138041(1) Dt. 08/11/2024 & 1070321994(1) Dt. 13/11/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac/Cit(A)’] Which Sprang From Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Anent To Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2014-15 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Adv Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 253(3)Section 37(1)Section 40(1)(i)

disallowances. Finding appellant being indifferent, the Ld. NFAC vide para 4.5 advanced ex-parte on merits and upheld the disallowance/addition by a reasoned order. ITAT-Panaji Page 17 of 32 Damodar Mangalji & Company Ltd. Vs JCIT/ACIT ITA Nos.034 & 035/PAN/2025 AY: 2011-12 & 2014-15 20. The perusal of case record of impugned proceedings for AY 2014-15 revealed much alike

DAMODAR MANGALJI & COMPANY LIMITED,PANAJI vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE - 1, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 34/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 034 & 035/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2014-15 Damodar Mangalji & Company Ltd. Damodar Niwas, 1St Floor, Mc Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan : Aaacd6880G . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Jt./Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1/Circle-1(1), Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Adv Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr M Satish [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/12/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Twin Appeals Of Assessee Instituted U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Are Directed Against Separate Din & Order 1070138041(1) Dt. 08/11/2024 & 1070321994(1) Dt. 13/11/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac/Cit(A)’] Which Sprang From Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Anent To Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2014-15 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Adv Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 253(3)Section 37(1)Section 40(1)(i)

disallowances. Finding appellant being indifferent, the Ld. NFAC vide para 4.5 advanced ex-parte on merits and upheld the disallowance/addition by a reasoned order. ITAT-Panaji Page 17 of 32 Damodar Mangalji & Company Ltd. Vs JCIT/ACIT ITA Nos.034 & 035/PAN/2025 AY: 2011-12 & 2014-15 20. The perusal of case record of impugned proceedings for AY 2014-15 revealed much alike

THE OMKAR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, BELAGAVI

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE in aforestated terms

ITA 84/PAN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 84/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Omkar Urban Co-Op. Cr. Society Ltd. A/P. : Kangral (Bk.), Belagavi. Pan: Aaaat3508P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Chetan Chougule [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 250Section 253(1)Section 68Section 80ASection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

natural justice. 3. Because, the learned Assessing Officer has passed the best judgement assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, without giving proper opportunity to the Appellant, the said order of the Assessing Officer is bad in law and needs to be set aside ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 6 The Omkar Urban Co-op. Cr. Society

SHRI LOKESHWAR CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY NIYAMIT,LOKAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 & TPS, BAGALKOT

In the result, stay application of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn and that the appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 76/PAN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G.D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) S.A.No. 05/Pan/2023 & Shri Lokeshwar Co-Operative Vs Ito, Ward-1 & Tps, Credit Society Niyamit Bagalkot. Lokapur, Tq. Mudhol, Dist. Bagalkot Pan: Aaals 2253 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Saidappa Gadadi, Ca Revenue By : Shri N. Shrikanth, Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/08/2023 O R D E R Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: The Stay Application & The Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 23.02.2023 For A.Y.2013-14 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: Shri Saidappa Gadadi, CAFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth, DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

disallowing the same, order was passed u/sec. 143(3). Aggrieved by the action of the AO, the assessee filed an application u/sec. 154 which was also rejected. Aggrieved, assessee filed the appeal before the NFAC with a delay of 83 days. The NFAC had dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of limitation i.e. 83 days delay

KRISHNA PLANTATIONS PVT. LTD,MARGAO vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT - INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

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

ITA 199/PAN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji08 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.199/Pan/2023 (A.Y. 2020-21) Krishna Plantations Pvt Ltd, Vs National Faceless 15/1452,Nanuhouse, Varde Assessment Centre, . Valaulikar Road, 2 Floor, F-Ramp, Margoa-403601, Jawaharlal Nehru Goa. Stadium, New Delhi-110003 Pan/Gir No. Aaack6885G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Smt.Bhavya Goyal.Ar Revenue By Shri.Ravindra Hattalli Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08.05.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale ,Jm: The Assesse Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Nfac/Cit(A) Delhi Passed U/Sec143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld.Ar Has Not Pressed The Ground Of Appealno.1 & Made Endorsement; Accordingly This Ground Of Appeal Is Treated As Withdrawn & Is Dismissed.

disallowance of expenditure under various heads aggregating to Rs.21,62,039/-for the want of supporting evidences and passed the order u/sec143(3) r.w.s144Bof the Act dated 27.09.2022. Therefore, we considering the facts, circumstances, date of show cause notice, reply of the assesse and passing of assessment order on 27-09-2022 and the principles of natural justice

PENTAIR WATER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,VERNA vs. JCIT, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

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

ITA 76/PAN/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji22 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) Pentair Water India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Jcit, Margao Range, L-52-55, Verna Industrial Margao, Goa. Estate, Phase-Ii, Verna, Salcette, Goa. Pan: Aabcs 8856 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Agrawal, Fca Revenue By : Shri N. Shrikanth, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 22/08/2023 O R D E R Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Panaji, Dated 16.03.2020 For A.Y.2009-10 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Agrawal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth, DR

Section 154Section 234BSection 37Section 40

natural justice and come out with speaking order dealing with the submissions placed on record by the assessee and whether there is any issue of double taxation involved, in case in the relevant assessment year, the amount is disallowed

M/S SOVA,PANAJI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 24/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2018-19 M/S Sova Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan: Aacfs8862Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 263Section 56

nature the Ld. DR further stated ITAT-Panaji Page 11 of 20 M/s Sova Vs PCIT ITA No. 024/PAN/2024 AY: 2018-19 that, the direction dilated at para 8 of the impugned order was with a view to ensure that the assessee shouldn’t on one hand get expenditure capitalised for claiming depreciation and on other hand claim them doubly

SHRI ADINATH MULTIPURPOSE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

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

ITA 111/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member), SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)

Section 80P(2)(a)

disallowances by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled.Therefore, considering the principles of natural justice

SHRI ADINATH MULTIPURPOSE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

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

ITA 112/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member), SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)

Section 80P(2)(a)

disallowances by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled.Therefore, considering the principles of natural justice

SHRI RENUKA CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELGAVI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

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

ITA 64/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 64/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2020-21) Shri Renuka Co-Operative Vs National Face Less Credit Society Limited, Assessment Centre, . Hotel Keerti Campus, Nfac, P.B.Road, Delhi. Belgaum-590001, . Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Aabas0671B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 144Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

disallowances by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the principles of natural justice

SHRI BASAVESHWAR URBAN CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 180/PAN/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the entire disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT, NEAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 287/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the entire disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing

PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT LTD BHOJ,BHOJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIPANI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 272/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the entire disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing

THE MARATHA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5, BELGAUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 301/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the entire disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 255/PAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the entire disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing

KUMTA ADIKE MARATA SOPUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,KUMTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, KARWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 153/PAN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the entire disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANAJI, GOA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

ITA 286/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

natural justice, shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and remit the entire disputed issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing