← 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

Jhansi Lakshmi Ramanadham, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 886/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.886/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Smt. Jhansi Lakshmi Vs. Income Tax Officer Ramanadham Ward 8 (1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpr3566K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S. Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Arun Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Smt. Jhansi Lakshmi Ramanadham, (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 30.05.2024 For The A.Y 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, It Is Seen That There Is A Delay Of 292 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. The Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. Ar”) Submitted That The Assessee Is Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Advocate S. SandhyaFor Respondent: : Shri Arun Kumar, Sr. DR

claims relating to selling expenditure, cost of improvement and deduction under section 54 of the Act. The Ld. AO shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same time, the assessee is directed to cooperate fully in the proceedings and to refrain from seeking unnecessary adjournments

Girish Babu Durgam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 19/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.13 To 19/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2021-22) Shri Girish Babu Durgam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Pan:Ajupd6947J Circle 1(1), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Girish Babu Durgam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.11.2024 & 05/12/2024For The A.Ys 2015-16 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 153A

filed after the transfer of the appeal to CIT(A) and therefore it cannot be alleged that the assessee did not get an opportunity of being heard. In his alternate submission, the Ld. DR contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to remand the matter, it may be more appropriate ... issue to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication of the issue with a direction to provide one more effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all relevant evidences and written submissions in support of his claim

Girish Babu Durgam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle- 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 18/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.13 To 19/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2021-22) Shri Girish Babu Durgam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Pan:Ajupd6947J Circle 1(1), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Girish Babu Durgam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.11.2024 & 05/12/2024For The A.Ys 2015-16 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 153A

filed after the transfer of the appeal to CIT(A) and therefore it cannot be alleged that the assessee did not get an opportunity of being heard. In his alternate submission, the Ld. DR contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to remand the matter, it may be more appropriate ... issue to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication of the issue with a direction to provide one more effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all relevant evidences and written submissions in support of his claim

Girish Babu Durgam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 17/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.13 To 19/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2021-22) Shri Girish Babu Durgam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Pan:Ajupd6947J Circle 1(1), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Girish Babu Durgam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.11.2024 & 05/12/2024For The A.Ys 2015-16 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 153A

filed after the transfer of the appeal to CIT(A) and therefore it cannot be alleged that the assessee did not get an opportunity of being heard. In his alternate submission, the Ld. DR contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to remand the matter, it may be more appropriate ... issue to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication of the issue with a direction to provide one more effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all relevant evidences and written submissions in support of his claim

Girish Babu Durgam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 16/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.13 To 19/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2021-22) Shri Girish Babu Durgam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Pan:Ajupd6947J Circle 1(1), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Girish Babu Durgam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.11.2024 & 05/12/2024For The A.Ys 2015-16 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 153A

filed after the transfer of the appeal to CIT(A) and therefore it cannot be alleged that the assessee did not get an opportunity of being heard. In his alternate submission, the Ld. DR contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to remand the matter, it may be more appropriate ... issue to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication of the issue with a direction to provide one more effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all relevant evidences and written submissions in support of his claim

Girish Babu Durgam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 15/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.13 To 19/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2021-22) Shri Girish Babu Durgam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Pan:Ajupd6947J Circle 1(1), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Girish Babu Durgam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.11.2024 & 05/12/2024For The A.Ys 2015-16 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 153A

filed after the transfer of the appeal to CIT(A) and therefore it cannot be alleged that the assessee did not get an opportunity of being heard. In his alternate submission, the Ld. DR contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to remand the matter, it may be more appropriate ... issue to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication of the issue with a direction to provide one more effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all relevant evidences and written submissions in support of his claim

Girish Babu Durgam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 14/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.13 To 19/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2021-22) Shri Girish Babu Durgam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Pan:Ajupd6947J Circle 1(1), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Girish Babu Durgam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.11.2024 & 05/12/2024For The A.Ys 2015-16 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 153A

filed after the transfer of the appeal to CIT(A) and therefore it cannot be alleged that the assessee did not get an opportunity of being heard. In his alternate submission, the Ld. DR contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to remand the matter, it may be more appropriate ... issue to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication of the issue with a direction to provide one more effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all relevant evidences and written submissions in support of his claim

Girish Babu Durgam, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 13/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.13 To 19/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2021-22) Shri Girish Babu Durgam Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Central Pan:Ajupd6947J Circle 1(1), Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These Seven Appeals Are Filed By Shri Girish Babu Durgam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 29.11.2024 & 05/12/2024For The A.Ys 2015-16 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 153A

filed after the transfer of the appeal to CIT(A) and therefore it cannot be alleged that the assessee did not get an opportunity of being heard. In his alternate submission, the Ld. DR contended that if the Tribunal is inclined to remand the matter, it may be more appropriate ... issue to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication of the issue with a direction to provide one more effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all relevant evidences and written submissions in support of his claim

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Warangal

In the result, the primary objection filed by the assessee vide his letter, dated 02/06/2025 is allowed while for the appeal filed by

ITA 996/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.996/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shiva Kumar Thota, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Aaopt4519M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 10/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2024 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 26/05/2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Revenue Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. U. Mini Chandran
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 43BSection 68

approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (b) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority, by serving upon him a notice to show cause within such time ... approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (ii) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority; (iii) consider the reply of the assessee furnished, if any, in response

Parexel International (Irl) Limited, Ireland vs. ADIT (Int Taxn)-2, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 447/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.447/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Parexel International Vs. Additional Director Of (Irl) Limited, Ireland Income Tax Pan:Aaicp4417B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Kanchun Kaushal राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Parexel International (Irl) Limited, Ireland (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Adit (Int. Taxation)-2, Hyderabad (“Ld. Ao”) Dated 07.07.2023 For The A.Y 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Advocate Kanchun KaushalFor Respondent: : Smt. U Mini Chandran
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 92C

requires verification of any issue by way of submission of any document by the assessee or any other person or where an opportunity of being heard is to be provided to the assessee, the order giving effect to the said order under section 250 or section 254 or section ... section (5), in conformity with the directions complete, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in section 153, the assessment without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee, within one month from the end of the month in which such direction is received. What is contemplated under section