← 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

Shirdi Sai Sansthan, Odisha vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Odisha

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

ITA 157/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.157/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2024-2025) Shirdi Sai Sansthan Vs Cit(Exemption), Bhubaneswar M-28, Basanti Nagar, Rourkela, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabas 7597 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bajoria, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(E), Hyderabad, Dated 13.12.2024 Passed In Din & Notice No.Itba/Exm/F/Exm45/2024-25/1071213454(1) For A.Y.2024-2025. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Has Registration U/S.12A Of The Act W.E.F.07.02.2006 Vide An Order Dated 07.02.2006. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Had E-Filed An Application For Registration U/S.80G Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(E) Has Decided The Issue Against The Assessee On Two Grounds, One Being That There Is No Compliance On The Part Of The Assessee & The Second That The Assessee Has Selected The Wrong Section Code In Form 10A. It Was The Submission That The Issue May Be Restored To The File Of The Ld. Cit(E), So As To Grant The Assessee Adequate Opportunity To Represent His Case & Also For Rectification Of Defect, If Any.

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bajoria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

issues in this appeal must be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and we do so. The ld. CIT(E) shall also grant the assessee adequate opportunity to rectify any defects in the application and make

Kriya Yoga Dhayana Kendra, Odisha vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Odisha

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

ITA 156/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.156/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2024-2025) Kriya Yoga Dhayana Kendra, Vs Cit(Exemption), Bhubaneswar Jagda, Near Telephone Exchange Rourkela, Odisha-769042 Pan No. :Aaajk 0573 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bajoria, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(E), Hyderabad, Dated 13.12.2024 Passed In Din & Notice No.Itba/Exm/F/Exm45/2024-25/1071210019(1) For A.Y.2024-2025. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Has Registration U/S.12A Of The Act W.E.F.07.02.2006 Vide An Order Dated 07.02.2006. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Had E-Filed An Application For Registration U/S.80G Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(E) Has Decided The Issue Against The Assessee On Two Grounds, One Being That There Is No Compliance On The Part Of The Assessee & The Second That The Assessee Has Selected The Wrong Section Code In Form 10A. It Was The Submission That The Issue May Be Restored To The File Of The Ld. Cit(E), So As To Grant The Assessee Adequate Opportunity To Represent His Case & Also For Rectification Of Defect, If Any.

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bajoria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80G

issues in this appeal must be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and we do so. The ld. CIT(E) shall also grant the assessee adequate opportunity to rectify any defects in the application and make

Waseem Alam, West Champaran vs. ITO, National E Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 17/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.17/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Waseem Alam…...………………….....…..…………………....Appellant Bhawanipur Kursi Barawa, Sikta, West Champaran, Bihar-845307. [Pan: Alopa0369B] Vs. Ito, Nfac, Delhi…………..……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 22, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.11.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.9,68,550. The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under The E- Assessment Scheme, With The Specific Issue Of Verification Of Large Deduction Claimed Under Section 57 Of The Act. Notice Under Section 143(2) & Subsequently Under Section 142(1) Was Issued To The Assessee. Although The Assessee Uploaded Certain Documents Electronically In Response, The Details Were Found To Be Incomplete. The

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 57

restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to re-examine the issue afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings and produce all relevant supporting documents before the Assessing Officer