← 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

Sri Ram Samaj, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward - 3, Chennai

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

ITA 709/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.707, 708 & 709/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2015-16 & 2017-18 Sri Ram Samaj, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Arya Gowda Road, Exemption Ward 3, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aacts5436N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi, Dated 23.07.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2015-16 & Order Dated 29.06.2022 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Was Completed On 2

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)

remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A)-NFAC for fresh adjudication in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

Sri Ram Samaj, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward - 3, Chennai

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

ITA 708/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.707, 708 & 709/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2015-16 & 2017-18 Sri Ram Samaj, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Arya Gowda Road, Exemption Ward 3, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aacts5436N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi, Dated 23.07.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2015-16 & Order Dated 29.06.2022 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Was Completed On 2

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)

remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A)-NFAC for fresh adjudication in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

Sri Ram Samaj, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward - 3, Chennai

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

ITA 707/CHNY/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.707, 708 & 709/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2015-16 & 2017-18 Sri Ram Samaj, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Arya Gowda Road, Exemption Ward 3, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aacts5436N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi, Dated 23.07.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2015-16 & Order Dated 29.06.2022 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Was Completed On 2

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)

remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A)-NFAC for fresh adjudication in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

M/S Melongos India P Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward - 4 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 651/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.650 & 651/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 M/S. Melongos India P. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 16, Mullai Street, Lenin Nagar, Corporate Ward 4(1), Ambattur, Chennai 600 053. Chennai [Pan:Aabcm8934H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 8, Chennai, Both Dated 09.03.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013- 14 & 2015-16. 2. Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Delay By 818 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That Due To Outbreak Of Covid-19 Pandemic & Also Within The Lockdown Extended Period Allowed By The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Due

For Appellant: Shri G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)

Assessing Officer for both the assessment years. 8. Since, before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed to afford one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee to substantiate its case before the ld. CIT(A), in order to meet the ends of natural justices ... remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee by condoning the short delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year

M/S Melongos India P Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward - 4 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 650/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.650 & 651/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 M/S. Melongos India P. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 16, Mullai Street, Lenin Nagar, Corporate Ward 4(1), Ambattur, Chennai 600 053. Chennai [Pan:Aabcm8934H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 8, Chennai, Both Dated 09.03.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013- 14 & 2015-16. 2. Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Delay By 818 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That Due To Outbreak Of Covid-19 Pandemic & Also Within The Lockdown Extended Period Allowed By The Hon’Ble Supreme Court Due

For Appellant: Shri G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)

Assessing Officer for both the assessment years. 8. Since, before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed to afford one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee to substantiate its case before the ld. CIT(A), in order to meet the ends of natural justices ... remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee by condoning the short delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year

Sericulturists Cum Farmers Service Co-Operative Society Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Bengaluru

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

ITA 425/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Sericulturists Cum Farmers Service Co-Operative Society Ltd., The Principal 01Sfcs Building, Commissioner Of Near Bus Stop, Income Tax – 2, Sarjapura Town, Bengaluru. Vs. Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru – 562 125. Pan: Aaaas6468H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nitesh Ranjan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Praveen Karanth, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 14-09-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26-09-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30/03/2022 Passed By Ld.Pr.Cit-2, Bangalore U/S. 263 Of The Act Relating To A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal. Tax Effect Relating To Grounds Of Appeal Each Ground Of Appeal The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bengaluru-2 ("Pr. Cit") Dated 30-Mar-2022, Passed Under I. Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 ("The Act") N.A Insofar It Is Against The Appellant, Is Opposed To The Law, Weight Of Evidence, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57Section 68Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Learned Pr. CIT is in grave violation of principles of natural justice since the Appellant was not given a II. N.A reasonable opportunity of being heard and consequently, the impugned order is bad in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. The hearing notice dated ... filed by the assessee based on the above direction and to consider the claim in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee may be granted physical hearing in order to justify its claim. Accordingly the appeal filed