← 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

Pramila Panda, Bhubaneswar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 469/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.469/Ctk/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Pramila Panda Ito, Ward-3(4), Bhubaneswar Vs Plot No- 45, Infront Of Gunjan Place, Cuttack Road, Bhubaneswar, 751010 Pan No. : Aghpp 7813 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Kanhaiyalal Sharma, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Lucknow Order Dated 10/07/2025 Passed In Appeal No. Cit(A),Bhubaneswar-2/10230/2019-20 For The Assessment Year 2017- 2018. 2. At The Time Of Hearing It Was Fairly Agreed By Both The Sides That The Orders Of Both The Lower Authorities Are Exparte Orders. It Was The Prayer By The Ld. Ar That The Issues May Be Restored To The File Of The Ao & The Assesee Would Cooperative To The Set Aside The Assessment Proceedings. The Ld. Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To The Same. 3. I Have Considered The Rival Submissions. As It Is Noticed That The Both The Assessment Order & The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Are Exparte Orders, In The Interest Of Justice, I Am Of The View That The Issues Of The Appeal

For Appellant: Shri Kanhaiyalal Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

that the issues of the appeal 2 must be restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assesee adequate opportunity of being heard and I do so. 4. In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced

Cttc Hostel Fund, Bhubaneswar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 415/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No. 415/Ctk/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Cttc Hostel Fund Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar B-36, Chandaka Industrial Area, P.O:- Kiit, Bhubaneswar, 751024 Pan No. : Aacac 6726 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : None राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assesee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi Dated 19/05//2025 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assesee Has Sought An Adjournment Mentioning That Some Relevant Documents & Papers Are Require In The Connection With The Hearing Of The Appeal. As The Reasons Given Are Not Supportive The Adjournment Application Filed By The Assessee Stands Rejected. 3. A Perusal Of The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A) & That Of The Ao Clearly Shows That The Assessee Has Not Co-Operated In The Assessment Proceedings Which Has Led To The Ao Being Compelled To Pass An Exparte Order. This Is Also Mentioned By The Ld.Cit(A). This Being So, In The Interest Of Justice The Issues In This Appeal Are Restored To The File Of The 2 Ao For Readjudication After Granting The Assessee Adequate Opportunity Of Being Heard. 4. In The Result, Appeal Of The Assessee Is Partly Allowed For Statistical Purposes. Order Dictated & Pronounced In The Open Court On 25/09/2025. (जाज" माथन) (George Mathan) "याियक सद"य /

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R

justice the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the 2 AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 25/09/2025