← 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

Shambu Dayal Modi, Modi Plastic Udyog vs. Assessing Officer, ITO Ward

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

ITA 168/RAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.168/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shambu Dayal Modi………….……………............................……….……Appellant Modi Plastic Udyog, Mini Shed No.-31, 32, Phase-Iii, Adityapur Industrial Area, Adityapur, Jamshedpur, Seraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand-832109, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 832109. [Pan: Akxpm9308G] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Jamshedpur...…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 15, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”] Dated 19.03.2025 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012–13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018–19 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹5,45,350/-. Subsequently, The Assessing Officer Received Information That The Assessee Was Allegedly Involved In Gst Evasion By Facilitating Purchases Without Actual Movement Of Goods. As Per The Information Received From The Gst Database, The Assessee Had Shown Purchases Amounting To ₹13,12,816/- From M/S. Tumbqun Plastic During The Year Under Consideration. Based On This Information, The Assessing Officer Initiated Proceedings Under Section 148A(B) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961

Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 250

file of the learned CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after granting the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the proceedings before the CIT(A) and comply with all notices issued without fail. I.T.A. No.168/Ran/2025 Shambu

Shri Bhavarsinh Anesinh Rajput, Village Meghpar, Tal. Anjar-Kutch vs. The ITO Ward 1, Gandhidham, Gandhidham Kutchh

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

ITA 418/RJT/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.418 & 388/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Bhavarsinh Anesinh Rajpput Income Tax Officer, बनाम Survey No. 188, House No. 175/176 Ward-1, Gandhidham Meghpar, Anjar, Gujarat-370110 Vs. (Gujarat) Pan : Apepr3624N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Kapil Sanghavi, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghavi, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not Bhavarsinh Anesinh ... note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter

Bhavarsinh Anesinh Rajput, Anjar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Gandhidham

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

ITA 388/RJT/2025[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Oct 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.418 & 388/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Bhavarsinh Anesinh Rajpput Income Tax Officer, बनाम Survey No. 188, House No. 175/176 Ward-1, Gandhidham Meghpar, Anjar, Gujarat-370110 Vs. (Gujarat) Pan : Apepr3624N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Kapil Sanghavi, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghavi, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not Bhavarsinh Anesinh ... note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter

Jan Kalyan Samiti, Patna vs. CIT Exemption, Patna

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee, being ITA Nos

ITA 88/PAT/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.80 & 88/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Jan Kalyan Samiti…………..….………. …………………....Appellant Khasmahal, Road No.3, Chiraiyatand, Patna – 800001. [Pan: Aaatj5412D] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Patna....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anjan Biswas, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 13, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 15, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: Both These Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Patna, Dated 26.12.2024, For The Assessment Year 2022–23. Since The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee & Arise Out Of Common Facts & Connected Applications, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. Ita No. 88/Pat/2025 Relates To Rejection Of The Application In Form No. 10Ab Filed By The Assessee Seeking Regular Registration Under Clause (Ac)(Iii) Of Sub-Section (1) Of Section 12A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 & Ita No. 80/Pat/2025 Relates To Rejection Of The Application In

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

appeals, and restore the matters to the CIT (Exemption) with a direction to examine the applications afresh after affording the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall comply with all notices and produce requisite evidence to substantiate the genuineness of its activities and its eligibility under sections

Jan Kalyan Samiti, Patna vs. CIT Exemption, Patna

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee, being ITA Nos

ITA 80/PAT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.80 & 88/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Jan Kalyan Samiti…………..….………. …………………....Appellant Khasmahal, Road No.3, Chiraiyatand, Patna – 800001. [Pan: Aaatj5412D] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Patna....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anjan Biswas, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 13, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 15, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: Both These Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Patna, Dated 26.12.2024, For The Assessment Year 2022–23. Since The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee & Arise Out Of Common Facts & Connected Applications, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. Ita No. 88/Pat/2025 Relates To Rejection Of The Application In Form No. 10Ab Filed By The Assessee Seeking Regular Registration Under Clause (Ac)(Iii) Of Sub-Section (1) Of Section 12A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 & Ita No. 80/Pat/2025 Relates To Rejection Of The Application In

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

appeals, and restore the matters to the CIT (Exemption) with a direction to examine the applications afresh after affording the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall comply with all notices and produce requisite evidence to substantiate the genuineness of its activities and its eligibility under sections

Prabhu Dayal Bhartiya, Patna vs. Dc/Ac Circle-4, Patna

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

ITA 372/PAT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.372/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Prabhu Dayal Bhartiya (Huf)….………. …………………....Appellant 701, Shanti Kunj, Chajjubagh, Patna, Bihar- 800001.. [Pan: Aachp7738Q] Vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-4, Patna…....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 15, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Is Directed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.07.2025 Passed By The Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, A Hindu Undivided Family (Huf), Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013– 14 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹6,120/-. The Case Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing That The Assessee Was A Beneficiary Of Accommodation Entries In The Form Of Long-Term Capital Gains (Ltcg) From The Sale Of Shares Amounting To ₹55,16,804/- Received From M/S. Aayan Commercial Pvt. Ltd. & Its Associate Concerns. It

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the appellate I.T.A. No.372/Pat/2025 Prabhu Dayal Bhartiya (HUF) proceedings and furnish all relevant