← 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

Tapan Kumar Sethy, Cuttack vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Cuttack

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

ITA 227/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Tapan Kumar Sethy Vs. Ito, Ward-2(4), Purighat Road, Telenga Bazar , Cuttack Cuttack- 753009 Pan/Gir No. Blzps 1048 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhanshu Kr Das, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 15/06/2022 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Cuttack/10917/2019-20 Passed For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 952 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petition Dated 7.4.2025 Supported With Affidavit Stating The Reasons That Due To Serious Illness Of The Assessee’S Mother & Change Of P A G E 1 | 5 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sudhanshu Kr Das, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 253(3)

principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing officer with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Kalpana Ray, Rourkela vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Rourkela

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

ITA 221/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 Kalpana Ray Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Rourkela Gc 43 Rcms Complex, Panposh Road, Rourkela, 769004 Pan/Gir No. Aiapr 1980 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 27/08/2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2017-18/10286787 Passed For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 152 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petition Dated 31.3.2025 Supported With Affidavit Stating The Reasons That The Assesse Was Suffering From L3/L4 Disk Bulge, Lower Back Pain & Leg Pain, For Which She Was Admitted In The Hospital & The P A G E 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prateek kr Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 147

principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing officer with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Tajuddin Khan, Cuttack vs. Income Tax Officer, Cuttack

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

ITA 217/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Tajuddin Khan Vs. Ito, Ward -1(1), Cuttack C/O Taj Plast, Plot No 81, Phase Iii, Jagatpur New Industrial Estate, Jagatpur, Cuttack, 754021 Pan/Gir No. Aozpk 4787 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Lalatendu Sahu, Ca & Manmohan Mishra, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prarteek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 2 /7/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /7/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 27/01/2025 In Appeal No. Nfac/2014-15/10247212 Passed For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual Had Not Filed The Return U/S.139 Of The Act. During The Year Under Consideration, The P A G E 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Lalatendu Sahu, CA and Manmohan Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prarteek kr Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 148Section 69A

order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to his file with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Hindusthan Ore and Mining Private Limited, Barbil vs. ITO, Rourkela, Ayakar Bhawan, Udit Nagar Rourkela

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

ITA 210/CTK/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Hindustan Ore & Mining Private Vs. Ito, Rourkela, Ayakar Bhawan, Limited Udit Nagar, Rourkela Opposite East India Crusher Near Gurunanak Petroleum, Barbil, Keonnjhar- 758035 Pan/Gir No. Aacch 7805 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chittaranjan Panda, Ca Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 2 /7/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /7/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 07/06/2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2014-15/10129894 Passed For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Vide Adjournment Petition Dated July 01, 2025, Ld Ar Had Sought Adjournment, Which Is Rejected & The Appeal Is Disposed On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri Chittaranjan Panda, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 156Section 271(1)(c)

order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to his file with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Orissa Education Trust, Bhubaneswar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 202/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar & Rajesh Kumar & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2016-17 Orissa Education Trust Orissa Education Trust Vs. Acit, Acit, Exemption Exemption Circle, Circle, Plot Plot No. No. 361(A), 361(A), Kuberpuri, K Bhubaneswar Patrapada, Patrapada, Bhubaneswar- 751019 Pan/Gir No. Aa Aaaao 0485 G (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Re Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, Cit Ashim Kr Chakraborty, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 2 /7/202 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 2 /7/202 /2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 06/06/2024 06/06/2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Bhubaneswar Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-3/10160/2018-19 Passed For Assessment Year Passed For Assessment Year 2016-17. P A G E 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ADVFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, CIT

meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to AO’s file with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Bhoomishri Public Charitable Trust, Cuttack vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad

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

ITA 194/CTK/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumar Assessment Year : 2025-26 Bhoomishri Public Charitable Vs. Cit(Exemptions), Hyderabad Trust, Plot No.36/469, Secrtor-8, Cda, Po: Markat Nagar, Avinab Bidanasi, Cuttack. Pan/Gir No. Aaftb 6651 L (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) Hyderabad Dated 20.12.2014 Passed For Assessment Year 2025-26. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 18 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Supported With Affidavit Stating That By The Time The Ld Cit(E) Passed The Impugned Order, The Counsel Of The Assessee Trust Was Busy In Medical Treatment Of His Elder Father, Could Not Be Able To Look Into The P A G E 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2025-26

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, CIT DR
Section 80G

order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to his file with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Mukesh Kumar Ray, Jharsuguda vs. Income Tax Office (ITO), ITO Ward No. One

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

ITA 189/CTK/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) Before Shri Rl Reddy(Kz) Assessment Year : 2017-18 Mukesh Kumar Ray Kumar Ray, Sarbahal Vs. Ito, Ito, Income Income Tax Tax Officer, Officer, Road, Jharsuguda Road, Jharsuguda Jharsuguda Pan/Gir No. Akjpr 2805 H Akjpr 2805 H (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /07/202 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02/07/202 /2025 O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. The Order Of Ld. Addl/Jcit(A)-4, Mumbai Dated 19.2.2024 19.2.2024 In Appeal No. Cit(A),Sambalpur/10151/2019 Cit(A),Sambalpur/10151/2019-20 Passed For Assessment Year Passed For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was Called For Hearing. Called For Hearing. As The Matter Can Be Decided In The Absence Of The As The Matter Can Be Decided In The Absence Of The Assessee, I Proceed To Decide The Appeal After Hearing Ld Sr D.R. Assessee, I Proceed To Decide The Appeal After Hearing Ld Sr D.R. Assessee, I Proceed To Decide The Appeal After Hearing Ld Sr D.R.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prateek kr Mishra, Sr

Assessment Year : 2017-18 principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to his file with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co- operate with the proceedings before

Aries Minerals Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1) Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 187/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Aries Minerals Pvt Ltd., Plot Vs. Dcit, Circle -1(1), Bhubaneswar. No.924, Nigamananda Nagar, Lane-2, Bomikhal, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Aajca 2114 K (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 13.2.2014 In Appeal No.Cit(A)-1, 14573/2019-20 Passed For Assessment Year. 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By 320 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petition Supported By An Affidavit Stating That Against The Order Passed By Ld Cit(A) Dated 13.2.2024, The Appeal

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. DR

principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before

Abhishek Arts Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 614/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.614/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Abhishek Arts Private Limited Vs Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata 47A Gariahat Road, First Floor Gurudas Mansion, Kolkata Pan No. :Aagca 8688 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 02/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Kolkata-21, Dated 29.01.2025, Passed For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was The Submission Of The Ld. Ar That The Ld. Cit(A) With Affording Sufficient Opportunity Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. It Was Also Submitted That The Assessee May Be Given One More Opportunity To Represent Its Case Before The Ld.Cit(A), So That The Assessee Could Be Able To Provide The Details To Substantiate Its Case For The Year Under Consideration Before The Ld.Cit(A). 4. In Reply, Ld. Sr. Dr Supported The Orders Of The Ld. Ao & The Ld. Cit(A). It Was The Submission That Restoring The Matter To The File Of Ld.Cit(A)

For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR

justice, we restore the issues to the file of Id. CIT(A) for readjudicating the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand only) by the assessee to the Legal Aid Services, 3rd Floor