← 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

Chandra Panneerselvam, Vellore vs. PCIT., Chennai

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

ITA 91/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.91/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Chandra Pannerselvam, Principal Commissioner Of Income No.2/2, Old Munsif Court Street, Tax, Saidapet, Vellure, Circle-1, Tamil Nadu - 632 012. Vellore. [Pan: Aahpp9253B] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Bipin C.N, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

proceedings u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961 in A.Y. 2015-16 was issued on 18.02.2021 wherein the assessee was given an opportunity of being heard on 25.02.2021. Subsequently, another hearing letter issued on 04.03.2021 posted the case on 11.03.2021. In response, the assessee filed a written submission through ... Ld.PCIT u/s 263 dated 27.03.2021 is set aside with the directions to readjudicate the matter de novo, in accordance with law, after giving opportuning of being heard to the assessee and by passing a speaking order. The decision to remit the matter to the Ld. AO is however subject

Assistant Commissioner of Incometax, Corporate Circle-1 1, Chennai vs. Flextronics Technologies India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 3016/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3016/Chny/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Flextronics Technologies India Tax, Private Limited, Corporate Circle-1(1), Plot No.3, Phase Ii Sipcot Industrial Chennai. Park, Sandavellure C Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Chennai-602 106 [Pan: Aaacf5248E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Co No.5 /Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 Flextronics Technologies India Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Plot No.3, Phase Ii Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle-1(1), Park, Sandavellure C Village, Chennai. Sriperumbudur Taluk, Chennai-602 106 [Pan: Aaacf5248E] अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.P.Lalith Kumar, Ca & Mr.S.Sripal, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, Cit

For Appellant: Mr.P.Lalith Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT
Section 144Section 144C(1)

Chennai-16 lost of track pending remand proceedings. We find sufficient force in the arguments of the Ld.CIT(DR) to this effect. Reasonable opportunity of being heard is cornerstone of natural justice and cannot be violated. There is sufficient evidence on records to indicate that the Ld.CIT(A), Chennai ... apparently aware of pending remand proceedings. Needless to say, Revenue’s interest of being afforded an opportunity of being heard is stand vitiated. Be that as it may be in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the appellate order and remit the matter back

Mr. Zuzer Fakruddin Motorwala, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the levy of costs as specified above

ITA 5667/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankarzuzer Fakruddin V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward– Motorwala बनाम 30(1)(1), Kautilya Bhavan, C- Gala No. 21, 242, Jahangir 41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Boman Behram Marg, Kurla Complex, Bandra Husseini Lakda Bazar, (East), Mumbai – 400 051, Bellasis Road, Mumbai – Maharashtra 400008, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aavpm5636M Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Mathuria, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary (Sr.DR)
Section 144Section 147Section 246ASection 249(2)

pertinent to note that the principles of natural justice operate both ways, while the revenue authorities are required to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the taxpayer is equally obligated to co-operate with the authorities and utilize the opportunities extended. In the present case, despite receiving adequate opportunities ... ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter to the AO. He is directed to make de novo assessment after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee who, in turn, would ensure due compliance. 7.1 Considering the assessee’s lack of diligence in pursuing the assessment and also appeal

Patkai Christian College, Dimapur vs. ITO Ward 2(3) Exemption, Guwahati

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 237/GTY/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati20 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Manmohan Dasita Nos.235 To 237/Gty/2025 Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Patkai Christian College………………………………................……….……Appellant Chumukedima Sethekiema Dimapur, Nagaland, Dimapur, Nagaland-797103.. [Pan: Aaatp6904A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Guwahati.………..…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Kishor Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanjay Jha, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 20, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Captioned Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] For The Ay 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.235/Gty/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 69A

remit back this matter to the file of Assessing Officer with the direction to decide the same on merits after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings and submit all necessary evidences to substantiate its claim. Hence

Patkai Christian College, Dimapur vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Guwahati

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 236/GTY/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati20 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Manmohan Dasita Nos.235 To 237/Gty/2025 Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Patkai Christian College………………………………................……….……Appellant Chumukedima Sethekiema Dimapur, Nagaland, Dimapur, Nagaland-797103.. [Pan: Aaatp6904A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Guwahati.………..…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Kishor Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanjay Jha, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 20, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Captioned Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] For The Ay 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.235/Gty/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 69A

remit back this matter to the file of Assessing Officer with the direction to decide the same on merits after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings and submit all necessary evidences to substantiate its claim. Hence

Patkai Christian College, Dimapur vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Guwahati

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 235/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Manmohan Dasita Nos.235 To 237/Gty/2025 Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Patkai Christian College………………………………................……….……Appellant Chumukedima Sethekiema Dimapur, Nagaland, Dimapur, Nagaland-797103.. [Pan: Aaatp6904A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Guwahati.………..…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Kishor Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanjay Jha, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 20, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Captioned Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] For The Ay 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.235/Gty/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 69A

remit back this matter to the file of Assessing Officer with the direction to decide the same on merits after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings and submit all necessary evidences to substantiate its claim. Hence