← 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

The Pradhan Mercantile Association Charity Fund, Delhi vs. CIT Exemption, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2469/DEL/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Naveen Chandrathe Pradhan Mercantile Vs. The C.I.T Association Charity Fund [Exemption] 1210-16, Chandni Chowk Delhi Baratooti, Delhi

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT- DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(ii)

file of the ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT(E) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering the evidences/material furnished by the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings and furnish documents/evidence

Sh.Chetan Sharma, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle-7, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2461/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT- DR
Section 153C

neither granted adjournment not mentioned the petition seeking adjournment in order and decided the issue ex parte without giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(A) confirmed ex-parte, the order ... directed to decide the appeal Page 2 of 4 [A.Y 2018-19] Chetan Sharma vs DCIT afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering the evidences/material furnished by the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings and furnish documents/evidence

Kavish Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 13(1), Delhi

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

ITA 2235/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmakavish Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Nfac, 25/47, Gali No.14, Bhola Nath Nagar, Delhi. Vishwas Nagar, Delhi – 110 032. (Pan : Aahck5639B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Amit Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2025 Date Of Order : 10.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 07.02.2025 For Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. We Are Proceeding To Decide The Appeal With The Assistance Of Ld. Dr Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, It Is Observed From The Record That The Ld. Cit (A) Decided The Issue Against The Assessee By Observing That Assessee Has Not Pursued The Appeal Despite Being Granted Several Opportunities & The Details Are Given In The First

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR

appeal despite being granted several opportunities. In our considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we restore the matter to the file of ld. CIT (A) and direct ld. CIT (A) to give an opportunity

Umesh Kumar, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre Delhi

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

ITA 1414/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT DR

Officer also decided the issues ex-parte. In our considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we restore the matter to the file of Assessing Officer and direct the Assessing Officer to give an opportunity

Rajesh Bubna, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 20, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1424/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69A

mentioned therein. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not providing the Appellant with the reasonable opportunity of being heard neither before rejecting the Application under Rule 46A nor before the Appellate order. 5. That the appellant reserves the right to add, modify

Shri Rani Sati Foods and Grains Private Limited, Ranchi vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

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

ITA 7/RAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR

this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for readjudication afresh on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also during the course of readjudication proceeding before the CIT(A) positively. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee

Patel Minerals, Jamshedpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Chaibasa

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

ITA 174/RAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Paul, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR

Tribunal had originally set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. It was the submission that the impugned order is the second round before the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that before ... issues in this appeal must be restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the ld. AO. Should the assessee not cooperate in the proceedings before

Jharkhand State Bar Council, Ranchi vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Ranchi

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 13/RAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayjharkhand State Bar Council, I.T.O., Bunglow No. 8, North Office Para, Ward 1(1), Vs. Doranda, Ranchi-834002. Ranchi. Pan No. Aacaj 0989 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 148Section 148A

which governs the issue in hand, which is quoted herein below:- Section 148A(b) of the I.T. Act. "148A (b) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, by serving upon him a notice to show cause within such time, as may be specified in the notice, being

Jitender Singh, Arwal vs. ITO, Dhanbad

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

ITA 482/RAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR

issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to produce all the documentary evidence to substantiate his case during the course of readjudication proceeding before

Sukun Vincom Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Ranchi

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

ITA 37/RAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.37/Ran/2024 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Sukun Vincom Private Limited Vs. Ito, Ward-1(2), Ranchi 9, Lal Bazar Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal-700001 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aapcs 2490 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rajib Jain, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Rajib Jain, Ld. Cit- Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. We Have Considered The Submissions Of The Ld. Cit-Dr. Admittedly, The Assessee Has Not Represented Its Case Before The Ld. The Ao Nor Provided Any Details With Regard To Its Claim. In Absence Of Genuineness Of Transaction, Creditworthiness & Verification Of Source Of Funds, The Could Not Verify The Investments Made In Unlisted Equities During The Period Under Consideration. As Mentioned Earlier, These Are Basically Ex-Parte Order Before The Ao. This Being So, In The Interest Of Justice & So As To Grant The Assessee Opportunity To Substantiate Its Case, The Issues In This Appeal Are Restored To The File Of The Ld. Ao For Readjudication On Merits After Granting The Assessee Adequate Opportunity Of Being Heard. The Assessee Is Also Directed To Produce The Directors Of The Company (Sellers) To Substantiate The Identity, Creditworthiness & Source Of Funds & Transactions Made On Unlisted Equities. 4. In The Result, Appeal Of The Assessee Is Partly Allowed For Statistical Purposes.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR

issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to produce the directors of the company (sellers) to substantiate the identity, creditworthiness and source of funds and transactions

Nikit Kumar Mittal, Bokaro vs. National Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 356/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the Id.CIT(A). Even before the Id.CIT(A) the assessee did not comply on the various dates, therefore, the Id. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in further appeal before this Tribunal stating that since the impugned passed by the Id. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order without looking into the merits of the case, therefore, another opportunity may be given to the assessee by setting aside the order

For Appellant: ShShubham Choudhary, ARFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.DR
Section 144

involved in the present appeal of the assessee to the file of ld. CIT(A) to re-examine the issues after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply to the notices to be issued by the ld. CIT(A) and furnish

Kunti Devi, Jharkhand vs. CIT (A), NFAC

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 294/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T Pandya Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

involved in the present appeal of the assessee to the file of ld. CIT(A) to re- examine the issues after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply to the notices to be issued by the ld. CIT(A) and furnish

Sai Engineering, Jamshedpur vs. I.T.O. Ward 3(1), Jamshedpur

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

ITA 282/RAN/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

issues in these appeals are restored to the file of ld. JCIT(A) for adjudication on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, both these appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 09/10/2025. (RATNESH

Sai Engineering, Jamshedpur vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Jamshedpur

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

ITA 281/RAN/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

issues in these appeals are restored to the file of ld. JCIT(A) for adjudication on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, both these appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 09/10/2025. (RATNESH

Bharat Lal Tahalyani, Janjgir-Nalia, Janjhgir-Nalia vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

ITA 479/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 479/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2016-17)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

many of the cases qualifies to be set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, we are of the considered opinion that the present matter which was decided on ex-parte basis ... matter came up before the ITAT, it had failed to address the infirmity regarding the fact that the assessee was not afforded proper opportunity of being heard and the matter was dismissed ex-parte by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC which amounted to violation of principles of natural justice

Dilip Dayabhai Dhoriyani, Morbi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Morbi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 401/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.401/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2017-18) Dilip Dayabhai Dhoriyani, Income Tax Officer, Prop. Of Sairam Enterprise, Ceramic बनाम/ Ward-1, Morbi Plaza Shop No.0808 A National Income Tax Office, Morvi- 363 Vs. Highway, Trajpur, Morbi-363 642 642(Gujarat) "थायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं /. /. Pan/Gir No Asxpd1808J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

same had escaped assessment and therefore, before forming the opinion for issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act, an opportunity of being heard was provided to the assessee, as per provisions of section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, by issuing show-cause notice

Govind Prasad, Chhapra vs. Dc, Circle -1, Muzaffarpur

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

ITA 359/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18 Govind Prasad…..……………..……………………….……….……….……Appellant Lic Of India, Brach-1, Chapra, Saran, Chhapra, Bihar – 841301. [Pan: Afopp0865M] Vs. Dc, Circle-1, Muzaffarpur………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Shikesh Jha, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 09, 2025 Order Per Madhumita Roy: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.06.2025 Passed By Nfac, Delhi Arising Out Of The Order Dated 20.12.2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In This Case, The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming Additions Of Rs.2,06,38,132/- & Rs.4,60,232/- Made By The Assessing Officer Without Giving Sufficient Opportunity To Substantiate The Claim Of The Assessee Before The Lower Authorities.

Section 144Section 250

dispose of this appeal by remitting the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for considering the same afresh upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidences which the assessee may choose to file in support

Prem Ranjan Patel, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 5 (4), Patna

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

ITA 350/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 69A

submission made by the ld. AR is found to be acceptable. In that view of the matter, the assessee be given a further opportunity of being heard on the issue itself afresh by the Assessing Officer in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice as submitted ... dispose of this appeal by remitting the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider the same afresh upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidence(s) including the proof of receipt of Rs.20 lakhs

Asif Iqubal, Siwan vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Siwan

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

ITA 315/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

addition made by the Ld. A.O. is based upon flimsy ground without looking into the merit of the matter and without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 8. That the policy of natural justice has not been followed as the genesis for the disposal of the said ... subsequent period in the said bank account of the appellant? 2. Whether ITO WARD 2(3), SIWAN was justified in not giving opportunity of being heard to the appellant? I.T.A. No.: 315/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Asif Iqubal. 3. Whether ITO WARD 2(3), SIWAN was justified in not ensuring

Md Iftakhar Alam, Araria vs. ITO, Purnea

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

ITA 389/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194HSection 250Section 69A

remitted back to the Ld. AO for making the reassessment de novo. 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