← 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

Shri Rambag Mandir Tatha Ramchandraji Bhagwan Sansthan, Pandharpur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 658/PUN/2025[Not Applicable]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj DandgavalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune has not granted adequate opportunity of being heard which is contrary to the principles of natural justice. 6. The assessee prays to add, amend, alter, withdraw or delete

Deccan Gymkhana, Pune vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 444/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Sharad A Vaze &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

Income Tax Act, 1961 should not be cancelled. The assessee was specifically be cancelled. The assessee was also given opportunity of being heard. The said notice was duly served on the assessee through e-portal and email. 3.1 However, the assessee neither furnished any compliance to the said notice ... availed the opportunity of being heard. 4. The assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (ii) of second proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to verify the genuineness of activities of the institution/fund

Deccan Gymkhana, Deccan vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 1554/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Sharad A Vaze &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

Income Tax Act, 1961 should not be cancelled. The assessee was specifically be cancelled. The assessee was also given opportunity of being heard. The said notice was duly served on the assessee through e-portal and email. 3.1 However, the assessee neither furnished any compliance to the said notice ... availed the opportunity of being heard. 4. The assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause (ii) of second proviso to section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to verify the genuineness of activities of the institution/fund

Satyam Transformers Private Limited, Aurangabad vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Aurangabad

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

ITA 1239/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1239/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Satyam Transformers Private Limited, Ito, Ward-2(3), Sharadanand, Opposite Telephone Office, Aurangabad Ajabnagar, Aurangabad-431001 Vs. Pan : Aakcs4648D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 04-08-2025 Date Of 27-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. RathiFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 72

settled the appeal in Vivad se Vishwas. 1.2 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without granting and sufficient and adequate opportunity of being heard. 1.3 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 deserves ... first appellate authority for contesting the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. Needless to mention, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) must afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before deciding the appeal. With the aforesaid observations, the grounds raised are allowed for statistical purposes.” 10. In light

Kishor Gajanan Patil, Pune vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Aurangabad

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

ITA 1076/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merit after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to make his submissions, if any, on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment

Riteshh Agarwal, Kolkata vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 826/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 250Section 69A

restored the issue to the file of Ld. AO with a direction to decide the same after providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard qua the issue as raised in ground No. 4, that no notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued. 5. During the course

Mitra Instritution Bhowanipur Branch, Kolkata vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 742/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

Exemption) is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to him for deciding the application afresh after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering the reply which may be filed and thereafter, he shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Hence

The Salesian Sisters, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Exempt, Kolkata

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

ITA 576/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 264

appeal taken by the assessee on merit by passing a speaking order. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments and rule ... Rules, 1962 shall also be followed and an opportunity of being heard may be provided to the Ld. AO, if required. Accordingly, the grounds taken by the assessee in its appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

DCIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Decorum Infrastructure Private Limited, Howrah

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1762/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Miraz D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, Sr. DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

assessee has filed a letter of objection on 08.05.2024. In the course of fresh assessment proceeding, the assessee was allowed with opportunity of being heard and objections raised by them are disposed thereof. After taking into account the submissions of the assessee , the AO passed the assessment order

Amigos Prasasth Path Social Welfare Society, Kolkata vs. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 1501/KOL/2025[---]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1500 & 1501/Kol/2025 Amigos Prasasth Path Social Welfare Society.……….……….……….……Appellant 1 Ram Krishna Bagchi Lane, Beadon Street, Battala, Kol- 700006.. [Pan: Aajta7599P] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Both Dated 28.06.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Rejecting The Separate Applications Filed In Form 10Ab For Final Approval As Per The Provisions Of Sections 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arise From The Final Registration U/S 12A Of The Act Which Is Compulsory For Getting Subsequent Registration U/S 80G Of The Act Which Are Interconnected In Both The Appeals & Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. Ita No.1500/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

section 13 or drawing adverse conclusions based on hypothetical or unsubstantiated apprehensions. The assessee shall also be afforded a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard before passing fresh orders in accordance with law.” 5.2 We also find that it has clearly been defined in the trust deed that establishment

Amigos Prasasth Path Social Welfare Society, Kolkata vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 1500/KOL/2025[----]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1500 & 1501/Kol/2025 Amigos Prasasth Path Social Welfare Society.……….……….……….……Appellant 1 Ram Krishna Bagchi Lane, Beadon Street, Battala, Kol- 700006.. [Pan: Aajta7599P] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Both Dated 28.06.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Rejecting The Separate Applications Filed In Form 10Ab For Final Approval As Per The Provisions Of Sections 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arise From The Final Registration U/S 12A Of The Act Which Is Compulsory For Getting Subsequent Registration U/S 80G Of The Act Which Are Interconnected In Both The Appeals & Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. Ita No.1500/Kol/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

section 13 or drawing adverse conclusions based on hypothetical or unsubstantiated apprehensions. The assessee shall also be afforded a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard before passing fresh orders in accordance with law.” 5.2 We also find that it has clearly been defined in the trust deed that establishment

Justin Tradelink Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 9(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1293/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

justice, we restore the issues to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudicating the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to payment of cost of ₹10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) by the assessee to the Legal Aid Services, 3rd Floor ... aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the appeal to him to be decided afresh, who shall allow an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also grant an opportunity of representing the case and be heard to I.T.A. No.: 1293/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Justin

Shyam Greenfield Developer Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1164/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

passing a speaking order as is required u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary I.T.A ... Year: 2018-19 Shyam Greenfield Developer Private Limited. adjournments and rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 shall also be followed and an opportunity of being heard may be provided to the Ld. AO, if required. Accordingly, the grounds taken by the assessee in his appeal are partly allowed

Shree Capital Services Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1152/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 253(3)

Bench that the request of the assessee to remand the issue before the Ld. AO may be allowed so that a proper opportunity of being heard may be provided. Hence, after examining the facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order ... appropriate order which shall be considered by the Ld. AO. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Accordingly, the grounds taken

M/S. Rotary Club of Hooghly Welfare Trust, Hooghly vs. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 1041/KOL/2025[-----]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

Exemption) is set aside and the matter is remanded to him for deciding the application afresh after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, allowing an opportunity to the assessee to correct the section code and seeking the reply from the assessee in respect of the queries raised

Sushila Diamonds, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chamber

In the result, the grounds of appeal and the appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4402/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankarsushila Diamonds V/S. Income Tax Officer B 303/304, Lake Lucerne बनाम Ward 19(3)(1), Piramal Lane Homes, Powai, Chamber Mumbai, Mumbai - 400076 Mumbai - 400012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aakfs7138M Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, (Sr. AR)
Section 147Section 250

mandatory requirement under the Faceless Appeal Scheme. The Appellant respectfully prays that the said order be set aside, and a fresh opportunity of being heard and to submit supporting documentary evidence be granted. 3. At the outset, it was noticed that the instant appeal is substantially delayed. In this regard

Rajeev Surana, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4196/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Rajeev Surana, Income Tax Officer, Ward 201 Shamiana 67F, Walkeshwar 19(3)(1), Room No. 202, Road, Walkeswar, Matrummandir Tardeo, V Mumbai-400006, Maharashtra Mumbai-400007, S Maharashtra

For Appellant: Shri Aditya SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

merits. 9 Rajeev Surana vs ITO, Ward-19(3)(1), Mumbai 15. Needless to say, the assessee shall be afforded with reasonable opportunity of being heard in the set aside appellate proceedings. The assessee as conceded through its authorized representative before us, also directed to cooperate and assist proactively

Raj Impex, Thane vs. PCIT Central Mumbai 1, Mumbai

Accordingly, are rendered as dismissed

ITA 3719/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI BEENNA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 263Section 80I

Assessing Officer is directed to take necessary actions including the passing of the order of assessment after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 9. Being aggrieved that the aforesaid order by the Ld. PCIT, the assessee preferred the present appeal challenging the revisionary proceedings in terms

Raj Impex, Thane vs. PCIT Central Mumbai 1, Mumbai

Accordingly, are rendered as dismissed

ITA 3718/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 263Section 80I

Assessing Officer is directed to take necessary actions including the passing of the order of assessment after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 9. Being aggrieved that the aforesaid order by the Ld. PCIT, the assessee preferred the present appeal challenging the revisionary proceedings in terms

Raj Impex, Thane vs. PCIT Central Mumbai 1, Mumbai

Accordingly, are rendered as dismissed

ITA 3717/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 263Section 80I

Assessing Officer is directed to take necessary actions including the passing of the order of assessment after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 9. Being aggrieved that the aforesaid order by the Ld. PCIT, the assessee preferred the present appeal challenging the revisionary proceedings in terms