← 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

Sh. Virat Arora, Haldwani vs. ACIT, CC- Haldwani, Haldwani

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 160/DDN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 147

Assessee as well as the Assessee's Representative have appeared in virtual mode and submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. 4. Per contra ... with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. Sh. Virat Arora Vs. ACIT 6. In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order

Sh. Virat Arora, U.S.Nagar vs. DCIT, Dd-, Haldwani

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 159/DDN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 147

Assessee as well as the Assessee's Representative have appeared in virtual mode and submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. 4. Per contra ... with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. Sh. Virat Arora Vs. ACIT 6. In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order

Shashwat Jaiswal, Haldwani vs. Income Tax Department Faceless Assessment Unit, New Delhi

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

ITA 126/DDN/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Sept 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

order of ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to his file with the directions to pass the order after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to participate in the proceedings and filed all the necessary details and evidences in support

Harendra Sharma, Morena vs. Income Tax Officer 2(2) Gwalior, Gwalior

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

ITA 332/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Harendra Sharma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Bolenath Gupta, Adarsh Ward-2(2), Nagar, Gali No. 1, Lohiya Gwalior Bazar Porsa, Morena, Mp 476115 Pan: Cuqps8743C Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Sharma, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 145(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)

NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Harendra Sharma Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to file fresh evidences, if any, and raise fresh grounds, if any, in support of his contentions. The assessee is directed

Kripa Ram Vyas, Gwalior vs. ITO, Gwalior

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

ITA 216/AGR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Kripa Ram Vyas, Vs. Ito, Pgv College, Jiwaji Gwalior Ganj, Lashkar Ho, Gird, Gwalior -474001 Pan: Abupv2129C Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147

file of the ld AO for de novo adjudication in accordance with the law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to raise fresh grounds challenging the validity of reassessment, if he so desires, and file additional evidences

Chandulal Bhimjibhai Dabhi, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(1), Rajkot

ITA 504/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Kamal Bhambhani Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-DR

ITA No. 504/Rjt/2025 Chandulal Bhimjibhai Dabhi आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, राजकोट न्यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT

Shri Dipakkumar Parsotamdas Asanani, Village Jetpur, Dist. Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward 1 (2) (1), Rajkot

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

ITA 435/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainibefore Dr. Arjun Lal Sainibefore Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 435/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" "नधा"रणवष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dipakkumar Parsotamdas Asanani Asanani Ito, Nfac, Delhi Prop. Jay Jalaram Enterprise, M. G. , M. G. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot – 360370 Road, Rajkot - 360001 Pan : Aecpa2955G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By Assessee By : Shri Brijesh Parekh,Ld.Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Revenue By Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. D. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Brijesh Parekh,Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld
Section 147Section 148

Considering the above facts, Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the opportunity ... fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without de without delving much deeper into the merits

Shri Bhimabhai Karshanbhai Gareja, Fulrama, Tal. Magrol, Dist. Junagadh vs. The ACIT Circle1, Junagadh

In the result, both these appeals (ITA 415 & 416/Rjt/2025 for AY 2017-18) of

ITA 416/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Fenil H. Maheta, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 253(3)

other materials brought on record. Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the Id. CIT(A). I note that the Id. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based ... 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, I restore the matter

Shri Dayabhai Karshanbhai Gareja, Mangrol, District Junagadh vs. The ACIT Circle1, Junagadh

In the result, both these appeals (ITA 415 & 416/Rjt/2025 for AY 2017-18) of

ITA 415/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Fenil H. Maheta, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 253(3)

other materials brought on record. Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the Id. CIT(A). I note that the Id. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based ... 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, I restore the matter

Shri Nathalal Arjanbhai Nageshri, Patan vs. The ITO Ward-2 (1), Jamnagar

ITA 920/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Sept 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Darshak Trivedi Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-DR

ITA No. 919 & 920/Rjt/2024 Nathalal Arjanbhai Nageshi आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,राजकोट न्यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC

Shri Nathalal Arjanbhai Nageshri, Patan vs. The ITO Ward-2 (1), Jamnagar

ITA 919/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Sept 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Darshak Trivedi Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-DR

ITA No. 919 & 920/Rjt/2024 Nathalal Arjanbhai Nageshi आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, राजकोट न्यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC

Baldevbhai Vithhakbhai Patel, Pardi vs. ITO, Ward 1, Vapi

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

ITA 582/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Surat12 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Am. Smatpt Sitet Bta No.582/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing)

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250Section 253(3)Section 68

case on merit. 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 deeper into the merits of the case, in the interests of justice, we set aside ... Minister’s National Relief Fund (PMNRF)” within 3 weeks after receipt of this order and to pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish explanations and submit the relevant details and documents before

Venkata Prasada Rao Nandina, Rajahmundry vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Rajahmundry

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

ITA 325/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna, Advocate (Hybrid)For Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, SR-DR

impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for adjudication afresh on merits, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to file all ITA No.325/VIZ/2025 4 necessary evidence and explanations in support of his claim

Vinai Shukla, Lucknow vs. ACIT-1, Lucknow New, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 624/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.624/Lkw/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vinai Shukla V. Acit-1, Lucknow New 2/280, Vikas Khand Gomti Lucknow Nagar, Lucknow-226010. Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001. Pan:Asnps3558C अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Ms Shweta Mittal, Ca प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Prajesh Srivastava, Sr. Dr सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21 08 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 12 09 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms Shweta Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prajesh Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 153Section 50C

natural justice. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the order which was barred by limitation ... assessee. Now, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The assessee has taken multiples grounds including the grounds that adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee was not provided by the Ld. CIT(A). Apropos to the grounds of appeal, Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that

Roshanlal Khichi, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-6(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 501/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68

hereby set aside, and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de-novo adjudication after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after examining all evidence that may be placed on record. The assessee is directed to appear before the Assessing Officer

Shree Hanumant Pakshighar Charitable Trust-Ujalvav, Bhavnagar vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 221/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhashree Hanumant Commissioner Of Income Pakshighar Charitable Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad Trust - Ujalvav, Nr Chabutra Mukam Ujalvav, Taluka Umrala, Vs. Bhavnagar – 364320 Gujarat. [Pan – Abets0128Ch]

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

after ensuring that all other conditions as stipulated u/s. 80G(5) of the Act are complied. The assessee may also be allowed an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open

Shree Fofaria Charitable Family Trust, Vadodara vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1082/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Viranch Modi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

registration from provisional approval of registration granted under clause (iv) of first proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act- Without giving adequate opportunity of being heard, thereby breaching principals of natural justice. Shree Fofaria Family Charitable Trust vs. CIT(E) Asst. Year –N.A. - 2– On the plea that your ... counsel for the assessee submitted that the order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice, especially as no adequate opportunity of being heard was provided, and the application was rejected on a purely technical ground. The ld. counsel for the assessee also submitted that the incorrect clause

Nandigram Krashi Awam Gram Vikas Sanstha Suga, Nanded vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle, Aurangabad

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

ITA 1762/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B Phadke (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(6)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

account of unexplained money made by the learned AO. 2. Learned CIT(A) ought to have granted an appropriate opportunity of being heard to the appellant for making requisite submission considering the principle of natural justice. The appellant intends to make all the requisite submissions along with related documentary evidence ... restore the issue to his file to decide the same afresh on merits as per fact and law after giving one final opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall provide the requisite support in terms of submitting the relevant documents/evidence as may be required/called

Narayansinthy Gajendra Patro, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 13(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Hyderabad

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

ITA 698/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA Srikanth PolireddyFor Respondent: Sri Suresh Babu KN, Sr. AR
Section 143(1)Section 234Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

erred in passing the order without providing the assessee with an adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard. 4. The Hon'ble CTT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the entire amount of INR 14,66,815 /-, was paid within the financial year or before the due date

Pennam Foundation, Hyderabad vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee trust in ITA

ITA 222/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Us:

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

accordance with law. Needless to say, the assessee trust in the course of the set aside proceedings shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard and remain at liberty to submit any further documents or explanations as may be required. 11. In the result, the appeal filed