“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

M/S Ambitious Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Rajkot-Gujarat

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 123/RJT/2014[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Mar 2023AY 1997-98

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Mrs. Madhumita Royिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 1997-98 M/S. Ambitious Finance & Vs. Income Tax Officer, Investment Pvt. Ltd., Ward- 2(4), 107, Kapad Market, Para Bazar, Rajkot Rajkot Pan : Aabca 8076 C अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Written Submission Revenue By : Shri V.J. Boricha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2023 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta:

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri V.J. Boricha, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 234BSection 250

file of the AO with a direction to redo the assessment after calling for the required details and also after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Hon’ble 1TAT also observed that at the original assessment stage the assessee did not produce any evidence

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. Shri Vimal Chand Surana(HUF), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 62/JPR/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 139Section 143Section 147Section 150(2)Section 153CSection 2Section 250Section 69

second ingredient is that the order must be one which has come to be passed after the other person was given an opportunity of being heard. The person concerned must be put on notice that the consequence of the income being held as his is likely to follow ... proceedings prosecuted. Further more, he must be given an opportunity of being heard on that question. All these features must be borne out by records. 2.2 It is further submitted that Explanation 2 and 3 of Section 153 (3) (ii) (prior to substitution by Finance Act, 2016 w.e.f

Pawan Hans Helicopters Ltd, Noida vs. ACIT Circle-19(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1536/DEL/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. K. K. Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

case the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is bad in law having been passed exparte without giving the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard and in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case, the Learned

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Magnum International Trading Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2511/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

assessee had not fulfilled the condition as laid down under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 (the Rule) and without affording opportunity of being heard to the Assessing Officer (the AO)? 4. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified

The ITO, Ward-1, Palakkad vs. M/S. Snofield Foods Private Limited, Palakkad

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

ITA 837/COCH/2022[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.The Income Tax Officer -1 Vs M/S. Snofield Foods Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Door No. V/623B, Marutharode English Church Road Village, Kuppayode Road Palakkad 678014 Marutharode, Palakkad 678007 Pan – Aafcs3164B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.M. Veermani, Ca Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.03.2023 O R D E R Per: George George K., J.M. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 02.06.2022. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2006-07. 2. Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1) The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Addition Made By Assessing Officer U/S 41(1), Has Not Gone Into The Merits Of The Issue Simply Relying On The Fact That The Similar Issue Is Already Decided In Favour Of The Assessee In The Case Of Sister Concerns. 2) The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Not Taken Into Consideration That The Assessee Should Have Credited Percentage Of Deduction Of The Freezer Deposit Every

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Veermani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

direction to examine the issue relating to the freezer deposit afresh and take a proper decision in accordance with law, after affording necessary opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to furnish the details that may be called for by the Assessing Officer in this

Krushnalal Bhagwandas Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3)(7), Surat

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

ITA 291/SRT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.291/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Krushnalal Bhagwandas Patel, Vs. The Ito, Ward-1(3)(7), 3/36, Amba Krishna Bhavan, Ambaji Surat. Chowk, Rander, Surat – 395005, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adppp8611A (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bipin Jariwala, Ar Revenue By: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/03/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (In Short ‘ Nfac’), In Appeal No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1045270881(1), Dated 07.09.2022, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 13.12.2018. 2. At The Outset Itself, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Assailed The Impugned Order By Contending That Assessee Could Not Represent His Case Before Ld. Cit(A) & The Order Being An Ex Parte Order, Stood Vitiated On Account Of Violation Of Principle Of Natural Justice. The Ld. Counsel Submitted That Assessee Did Not Receive Notice From Cit(A) During Appellate Proceedings, Therefore Assessee Could Not Attend Proceeding Before The Ld. Cit(A), Hence, An Another Opportunity To Contest The Appeal Before The First Appellate Authority May Be Granted To The Assessee. Assessment Year. 2011-12 Krushnalal Bhagwandas Patel 3. On The Other Hand, Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. Dr) For The Revenue, Did Not Have Any Objection If The Matter Is Remitted Back To The File Of The Ld. Cit(A) For Fresh Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Bipin Jariwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

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, we restore the matter ... back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5776/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: The Date Of Expiry Of The Time Allowed Under Sub-Section (5) Of The Section 153 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Facts & Law Ignoring The Fact That The Provisions Of Section 244A(1)(Aa) & 244A(1A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Came Into Existence From 01.06.2016 & There Is No Provision For Allowing The Same With Retrospective Effect.

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(aa)Section 250

remand the file to the ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) is directed to pass a speaking order after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this

Jolly'S Soothing Era Foundation, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 4 (3), Jalandhar

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

ITA 255/ASR/2022[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sushil Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

counsel requested that this case may be remanded back to the ld. PCIT for fresh consideration of the matter on merits after granting opportunity of being heard. The Ld. DR has no objection to the request of the Ld. AR. Jolly’s Soothing Era Foundation v. ITO 5. Having heard ... Exemptions) to adjudicate the issue of registration u/s 12A afresh as per law after considering the submission of the assessee after granting adequate opportunity of being heard. No doubt, the appellant shall cooperate in the fresh proceeding before the PCIT. 6. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee

Shri Manjinder Singh S/O Shri Satnam Singh, Kapurthalla vs. Income Tax Officer -2, Kapurthala

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

ITA 5/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 69

record and to be filed in the fresh proceedings before him. The ld. CIT(A) is also directed to grant adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and consider the evidences produced on record by the appellant to explain its source of cash deposit in its bank account

Mesers Ess Ess Engineering Company Private Limited, Kapurthala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle IV, Jalandhar

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 400/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Vatta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR

Section 92E

facts, are remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication after considering the submission of the assessee and after affording an adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 13. In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court

M/S Ess Ess Kay Engg. Co.P Ltd, Kapurthala vs. Deputy Comissioner of Income Tax, Circle IV, Jalandhar

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 178/ASR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Vatta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR

Section 92E

DCIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi vs. National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5547/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

assessee could not discharge its initial onus to prove that the said expenses were not of capital in nature even after providing sufficient opportunities of being heard? 2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance on account ... when the assessee had not fulfilled conditions as laid down under Rule 46A of Income Ta: Rule, 1962(the Rule) and without providing opportunity of being heard to the AO? Reasons for the belief that income has escaped assessment: 4. The assessment

National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4723/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

M/S Maruti Nandan Food Products Pvt Ltd, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 2(1), Patna

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

ITA 124/PAT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 68

appellate proceeding. Assessee is given liberty to make any further submission before the Ld. CIT(A) to substantiate its claim for which reasonable opportunity of being heard be given. 7.4. Since the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for meritorious adjudication by passing a speaking order ... restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee is directed to be diligent in the appellate proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) is also directed to adjudicate upon the matter

Sabka Development Associated, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7305/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2023

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ramesh Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

learned CIT (E) has passed the order refusing to grant exemption without properly appreciating the facts of the case and providing proper opportunity of being heard. (iii) That the learned CIT(E) has failed to pass a speaking order. ITA No. 7304 & 7305/Del/2018 2 Sabka Development Associated (iv) That ... income tax act 1961 without issuing proper reasons to appellant to respond, and also without affording the appellant an opportunity of being heard on those reasons, which is violative of principle of natural justice, the order is bad in law and liable to be quashed. (xii) That the learned

Sabka Development Associated, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7304/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2023

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ramesh Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

Shri Abdul Ahad Dar, Srinagr vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3 (5), Baramula

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

ITA 194/ASR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Ms. Sunfat Ashraf Wani, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR

adjudicate afresh by passing a speaking order after considering the written submission of the assessee by granting adequate opportunity of being heard to him in view of principles of natural justice. No doubt the assessee shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). 7. In the result

Shri Swaranjeet Singh, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4 ( 5), Amritsar

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

ITA 108/ASR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. U. S. Arora, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR

assessee submitted that the AO and the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte qua the assessee without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant assessee. He contended that the ld. CIT(A) has fix up the date of hearing on 23.03.2022 vide notice dated ... determination of assessee’s income which could not be filed before the AO and the CIT Appeal (NFAC), in the absence of adequate opportunity of being heard, to the assessee by the authorities below. In support, the counsel has filed a written note which reads as under: Submissions: This

Naga Lakshmi Gunuputi, Bhimavaram vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 56/VIZ/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.52-54/Viz/2022 & 56/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2018-19) Venkata Pavan Kumar Gunuputi Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of [Pan : Bsrpg1889F] Income Tax Central Circle-2 Satyanarayana Gunuputi Rajahmundry [Pan : Aftpg4842F] Naga Lakshmi Gunuputi [Pan : Afapg3496D] 19-9-3/3, Bank Colony Near Water Tank, Bhimavaram (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.02.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 28.02.2023 Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

considering the assessee’s submissions. Therefore, the Ld.AR pleaded to set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and afford one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his claim with evidences. 6. Per contra, the Ld.DR submitted that the assessee was given several opportunities ... additions made by the AO during the assessment proceedings were confirmed arbitrarily. Hence, the Ld.AR pleaded to give one more opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his case with supporting evidences. Keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we are inclined to remit the matter

Satyanarayana Gunuputi, Bhimavaram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 54/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C