← 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

James Joseph Palackan, Palackal vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kottayam

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

ITA 624/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Years: 2015-16 James Joseph Palackan .......... Appellant Palco Constructions, Palackal, Vaikom Kottayam 686140 [Pan: Aeupp8573P] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kottayam .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri C.J. Romid, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 07.07.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Executing Civil Contracts. The Return Of Income For Ay 2015-16 Was Filed On 17.09.2015 Declaring Income Of Rs. 2,97,440/- & Also Agricultural Income Of Rs. 34,00,000/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kottayam (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Vide Order Dated 18.12.2017 Passed U/S. 143(3) Of The Income

For Appellant: Shri C.J. Romid, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

appeal. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the learned lower authorities dismissed the claim of the appellant without giving proper opportunity of being heard. Further, it is submitted that the AO had not disputed the fact that the appellant owns agricultural land of 37 acres while disbelieving

Sree Latha Yerabati, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 781/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.781/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Sree Latha Yerabati Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 13(3) Pan:Arcps4112J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S K Gupta राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Rakesh Chintagumpula, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Smt. Sree Latha Yerabati (“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 07.03.2025 For The A.Y 2016-17. Page 1 Of 6

For Appellant: Advocate S K GuptaFor Respondent: : Shri Rakesh Chintagumpula
Section 144BSection 147

restore the matter to his file with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate in the appellate proceedings and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. The assessee shall be at liberty to file

Srinivasa Rao Palabhatla, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 293/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.293/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Srinivasa Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Palabhatla, Hyderabad Ward – 7 (1) Pan:Aiupp8507H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S. Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Srinivasa Rao Palabhatla, (“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 04.05.2023 For The A.Y 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Seen That There Is A Delay Of 571 Days In Filing The Appeal Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition & Affidavit Along With Copies Of Page 1 Of 6

For Appellant: Advocate S. SandhyaFor Respondent: : Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. DR

denovo adjudication. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. AO with a direction to provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, examine the Page 5 of 6 ITA No 293 of 2025 Srinivasa Rao Palabhatla explanations, documents and evidence that the assessee may file

Mohammed Yousuf, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1036/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1036/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Mohammed Yousuf Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 8 (1) Pan:Athpm1283H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Mohammed Yousuf, (“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 11.02.2025 For The A.Y 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 49 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Along With A Sworn Affidavit

For Appellant: Advocate S SandhyaFor Respondent: : Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. DR
Section 147

matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and shall consider all evidence and submissions to be filed by the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty

Khader Hussain Shaik, Kadapa vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kadapa

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

ITA 1035/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1036/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Mohammed Yousuf Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 8 (1) Pan:Athpm1283H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Mohammed Yousuf, (“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 11.02.2025 For The A.Y 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 49 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Along With A Sworn Affidavit

For Appellant: Advocate S SandhyaFor Respondent: : Shri R. Kumaran, Sr. DR
Section 147

matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and shall consider all evidence and submissions to be filed by the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty

Faurecia Emissions Control Technologies India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Corporate Circle 1(1) Che, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1223/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1223/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2023-24 Faurecia Emissions Control Assistant Commissioner Of Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Income Tax, 1St Floor, No.634, Karumuthu Center, Corporate Circle-1(1), Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai. Chennai-600 035 [Pan: Aaaca8450F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.Siddhesh Chaugula, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.Siddhesh Chaugula, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

w.e.f. 1-4-1991.]….” 6.0 The principal issue that deserves to be decided is firstly whether Revenue was required to have given an opportunity of being heard to the assessee u/s 143(1) before passing of order u/s 143(1)(a) and second whether the issuance of communication dated ... taken as rendering of an opportunity in this direction. Page - 6 - of 9 ITA No.1223 /Chny/2025 As regards giving of an opportunity of being heard to the assessee u/s 143(1), we have noted that the statutory prescription is crystal clear. Section 143(1) extracted hereinabove clearly mandates that