← 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

Cuttack Central Co-Operative Bank Limited, Cuttack vs. ITO(TDS), Cuttack

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

ITA 393/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.392 & 393/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 & 2016-2017) Cuttack Central Co-Operrative Vs Ito(Tds), Cuttack Bank Limited Nimchouri, Buxi Bazar, Cuttack 753002 Pan No. : Aaabc 0373 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.R.Biswal, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri N.R.Biswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue involved ... restoring the issues in both the appeals to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard for both the years under consideration. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the CIT(A) positively. It would be worthwhile

Cuttack Central Co-Operative Bank Limited, Cuttack vs. ITO(TDS), Cuttack

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

ITA 392/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.392 & 393/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 & 2016-2017) Cuttack Central Co-Operrative Vs Ito(Tds), Cuttack Bank Limited Nimchouri, Buxi Bazar, Cuttack 753002 Pan No. : Aaabc 0373 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.R.Biswal, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri N.R.Biswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue involved ... restoring the issues in both the appeals to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard for both the years under consideration. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the CIT(A) positively. It would be worthwhile

Jayanty Mohapatra, Jajpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jajpur

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

ITA 387/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.387/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Jayanty Mohapatra Vs Ito, Jajpur Bada Biruan, Sankhachilla, Jajpur, 755015 Pan No. : Akmpm 2178 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved ... restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of 3 ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) shall be payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Bar Association

Pravat Kumar Pathal, Jajpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jajpur

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

ITA 386/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.386/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Pravat Kumar Pathal Vs Ito, Jajpur Cuttack Saree Centre Chorda, Jajpur Road, Jajpur, 755019 Pan No. : Akwpp 9494 R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Natbar Panda, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20/03/2025 Passed In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/11060/2019-20 For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 35 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Delay, Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, Delay Of 35 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Natbar Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved ... restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- 3 (Rupees Five Thousand only) shall be payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Bar Association

Rajesh Kumar Agrawal, Sambalpur vs. ACIT, Sambalpur

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

ITA 380/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.380/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Rajesh Kumar Agrawal Vs Acit, Range-1, Samabalpur C/O: R.K Rice Mill, Larnpark Remed, Sambalpur, 768101 Pan No. : Abmpa 1631 L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None(Adjournment Application Filed) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19/08/2024 Passed In Appeal No.Cit(A),Sambalpur/10281/2019-20 For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 242 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Delay, Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, Delay Of 242 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 3. None For The Assessee. Shri Vijay Singh, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: None(adjournment application filed)For Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating on merits after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. CIT(A) positively. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly

Orissa State Co-Operative Handicrafts Corporation Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 372/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.372/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) Orissa State Cooperative Vs Dcit, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar Handicrafts Corporation Limited Industrial Estate, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar Pan No. : Aaaao 0096 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR

submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved ... restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate 3 opportunity of being heard, The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the AO positively. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Gudla Bhaskar Rao, Jeypore vs. Income Tax Officer, Jeypore Ward, Jeypore

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

ITA 371/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.371/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Gudla Bhaskar Rao Vs Ito, Jeyopre Ward, Jeyopre Daily Market, Bhoi Street, Near Sai Krishna Hoel, Jeypore, Odisha Pan No. : Accpr 7359 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be 2 restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved ... restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the AO positively. 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Jatin Padhi, Jeypore vs. Income Tax Officer, Jeypore Ward, Jeypore

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

ITA 370/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.370/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Jatin Padhi Vs Ito, Jeyopre Ward, Jeyopre Mohanty Street, Jeyopre, Odisha Pan No. : Ajfpp 7214 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be 2 restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved ... restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the AO positively. 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical