← 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

Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Ajmer

ITA 429/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19 | Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib | | Taragarh Hill Ajmer, | Ajmer. | बनाम Income Tax Office, | Vs. | Ward-1(1), | Ajmer. | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAAAD5184H अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Rahul Pandya, Adv., Shri Priyesh Kasliwal, Adv. राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Pandya, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Sushil Kulhari, Addl. CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

provided, we deem it a fit case to remand all the three matters to the Assessing Officer for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Result 17. As a result, all three appeals are disposed of, for statistical purposes, and the matters are remanded ... Assessing Officer for decision afresh , after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Keeping in view that the Secretary-authorized representative of the appellant remained non compliant before both authorities i.e. Assessing Officer and Learned CIT(A), in respect of all three matters despite repeated opportunities, the appellant

M/S Teracom (P) Ltd, Ponda vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax - 2, Panaji

In the result, the Stay applications filed by the assessee are infactious and are dismissed, and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 2/Pan/2025 & S A.2/Pan/2025 I T A. Nos. 3/Pan/2025 & S A.3/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2010-11 & A.Y.2011-12 ) Teracom Ltd, Vs Jcit-Range-2, 55,1 St Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Patto, . Ponda Commerce Center Panaji, Ponda-403401, Goa-403001. Goa. . Pan .No. Aabct5254B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Rama Rivonkar.Ar Revenue By Shri.Capt Pradeep Arya.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 02.07.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 03.07.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assesse Against The Separate Orders Of The Nfac Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common & Similar, Hence They Are Clubbed, Heard & A Consolidated Order Is Passed. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Up Ita No.2/Pan/2025, A.Y 2010-11 As Lead Case & Facts Narrated. The Assessee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A)

restore the disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits and the CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee should also cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of the appeal and the grounds

M/S Teracom (P) Ltd, Ponda vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax - 2, Panaji

In the result, the Stay applications filed by the assessee are infactious and are dismissed, and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2/PAN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 2/Pan/2025 & S A.2/Pan/2025 I T A. Nos. 3/Pan/2025 & S A.3/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2010-11 & A.Y.2011-12 ) Teracom Ltd, Vs Jcit-Range-2, 55,1 St Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Patto, . Ponda Commerce Center Panaji, Ponda-403401, Goa-403001. Goa. . Pan .No. Aabct5254B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Rama Rivonkar.Ar Revenue By Shri.Capt Pradeep Arya.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 02.07.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 03.07.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assesse Against The Separate Orders Of The Nfac Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common & Similar, Hence They Are Clubbed, Heard & A Consolidated Order Is Passed. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Up Ita No.2/Pan/2025, A.Y 2010-11 As Lead Case & Facts Narrated. The Assessee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A)

restore the disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits and the CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee should also cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of the appeal and the grounds