← All Phrases

“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

Neelachal Gramya Bank, Bhubaneswar vs. Principal CIT-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 143/CTK/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2-13-14 Neelachal Neelachal Gramya Gramya Vs. Pr. Cit-1, Bank,(Succeeded By Odisha Bank,(Succeeded By Odisha Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Gramya Bank), Head Office, Gramya Bank), Head Office, Gandamunda, Gandamunda, Khandagiri, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaaln 0450 F (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.K.Mahapatra, Ca B.K.Mahapatra, Ca Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 7/02 2/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 7/02 2/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Pr. Cit Passed Cit Passed U/S.263 U/S.263 Of Of The The Act, Act, Dated 27.4.2020 27.4.2020 In Appeal No.Itba/Com/F/17/2020 /F/17/2020-21/1026986050(1) For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2013- 14. 2. Shri B.K.Mahapatra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri B.K.Mahapatra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri B.K.Mahapatra, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. M.K.Gautam, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 263

submission that the order u/s.263 is liable to be upheld. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. Coming to the first issue of opportunity of being heard, admittedly, notice u/s.263 has been issued on 12.2.2020 giving time to the assessee for 14.2.2020 i.e. two days. As there was no compliance ... notice to the date of fixing the hearing is clearly a violation of the provisions of natural justice. The statue provides for an opportunity of being heard. It provides for an effective opportunity of being heard. When emails are sent through electronic media, many a times such emails