“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

Om Prakash, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Office, Ward 3 (2). Gurgaon, Gurgaon

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

ITA 301/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanom Prakash, Vs. Ito, Ward 3 (2), H.No.1A, Vilalge Nakhrola, Tehsil, Gurgaon. Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Byhpp3234P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Vijh, Ca Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2025 Date Of Order : 26.06.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 16.12.2024 For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, It Is Brought To Our Notice That The Assessment Was Completed Under Section 144/147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) Due To Non-Cooperation Of The Assessee. Further It Was Brought To Our Notice That Assessee Has Raised Several Legal Issues & Also Raised Grounds On 2 Merit. It Is Brought To Our Notice That Ld. Cit (A) Has Not Disposed Off Legal Grounds. 3. After Considering The Submissions Of Both The Counsels, We Are Inclined To Remit This Issue Back To The File Of Ld. Cit (A) With A Direction To Dispose Off The Legal Grounds Raised By The Assessee After Giving Adequate Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Assessee. At The Same Time, We Direct The Assessee To Cooperate With The Lower Authorities Also. 4. In The Result, The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Allowed For Statistical Purposes. Order Pronounced In The Open Court On This 26Th Day Of June, 2025 After The Conclusion Of The Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Vijh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 144

file of ld. CIT (A) with a direction to dispose off the legal grounds raised by the assessee after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same time, we direct the assessee to cooperate with the lower authorities also. 4. In the result, the appeal filed

Mohd Aklakh, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1949/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalmohd Aklakh, Income Tax Officer, H.No.1772, Gali No.4, Ward-2(1)(4), Islam Nagar, Vs. Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad-201001. (Uttar Pradesh) Pan:Aglpa9361K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘The Cit(A) In Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 31.01.2024 U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Ld. Sr. Dr Appeared For The Revenue. 3. We Have Considered The Submissions Of The Ld. Sr. Dr. From The Perusal Of The Impugned Order It Clearly Shows That Despite Of Giving Several Opportunities Of Hearing, The Assessee Failed To Make Any Submissions Or Filed Documentary Evidences In Support Of His Claim, Therefore, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Compelled To Dispose Off The Appeal Of The Assessee By Confirming The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer.

Section 147

aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back again to his file for fresh adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. If assessee fails to represent his case, the Ld. CIT(A) is free to decide the issues on merits

Raja Qureshi, Hapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Hapur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5786/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Royraja Qureshi Vs. Income Tax Officer, 489, Shakar Kui, Ward-3(5) Hapur Uttar Pradesh- 245101 Uttar Pradesh – 245101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aampq4637K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr

Section 147

represented before the authorities below in our considered opinion, in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice the assessee be given a further opportunity of being heard to represent its case effectively before the First Appellate Authority. With the aforesaid observation we set aside the issue to the file ... consideration afresh and to pass a reasoned order upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidence which the assessee may chose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. It is also made clear that

The Indure Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assisstant Commissioner Income Tax, C R Building

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4256/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roythe Indure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit, Indure House, C.R. Building Savitri Cinema, R. No. 192A, 1St Floor, Greater Kailash Ii Delhi – 110002 Delhi- 110048 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaact0121C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr

Section 143(2)

find it fit and proper to remit the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidence which the assessee may chose to file

Antonius Tradex Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Gurgaon

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

ITA 3502/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shuklaantonius Tradex Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Plot No. 76D, V- 002, Phase-Iv, Ward-1(2), Udyog Vihar, Haryana Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaoca2472P

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 68

counsel for the Assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed his appeal ex-parte without affording the Assessee due opportunity of being heard. It was stated that accordingly, the confirmation by the ld CIT(A) of the addition made ... accordingly requested that the matter may be remitted back to the Antonius Tradex Pvt. Ltd ld CIT(A) for readjudication after giving due opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The ld counsel assured that due compliances shall be made to the statutory notices of the First Appellate Authority

Mangilal Datla, Banswara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Banswara, Banswara

ITA 304/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

erred in law as well as on the fats of the case in passing the assessment order without providing the adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard in gross breach of law, hence the order may kindly be quashed and entire addition liable to be deleted ... same back to the file of the Ld.AO with the directions to the Ld.AO to frame the assessment order afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The appellant is also directed to produce all the necessary documentary evidence in support of its claim before the Ld.AO

Maken Longermongla, Dimapur vs. ITO, Ward 1, Dimapur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 200/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) In Response To Notices Issued From His Office. The Ld. Ar Pointed Out That In Ita No. 199/Gty/2024, This Fact Is Recorded On Page 7 Para 3 Of The Impugned Order & In Ita No. 200/Gty/2024 Also This Fact Is Recorded At Page 7 In Para 3 Of The Impugned Order For That Year. It Was Also Pointed Out That Even Before The Ld. Ao, The Assessee Had Not Been Able To Make Any Presentation Of Facts. In Light Of These Facts, It Was Prayed That The Matter May Be Remanded Back To The File Of Ld. Ao So That The Assessee Has One More Opportunity Of Presenting The Facts.

Section 250

assessment proceedings and be alert in responding to notices issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer. The Ld. AO would, of course, provide ample opportunity of being heard. 4. With these remarks, these two appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 25.06.2025 [Manomohan Das] [Sanjay Awasthi

Maken Longermongla, Dimapur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dimapur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 199/GTY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Section 250

Pelhoubeinuo Sopfii, Kohima vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Dimapur

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

ITA 11/GTY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh GoenkaFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, JCIT

Section 10(26)Section 250Section 69A

Dimapur AY: 2021-22 We direct the ld. AO to reconsider the claims of the assessee after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard. At the same time, we direct the assessee to substantiate her claims before the ld. AO. The parties have also no objection in remanding

Hanumant Ingots Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

Accordingly the same is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 347/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 346 & 347/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

matter came up before the ITAT, it had failed to address the infirmity regarding the fact that the assessee was not afforded proper opportunity of being heard and the matter was dismissed ex-parte by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC which amounted to violation of principles of natural justice ... part of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In light of such decision, the petitioner ought to have been granted an opportunity of being heard Hanumant Ingots Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Raipur which, partakes the characteristic of the fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution

Hanumant Ingots Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Raipur

Accordingly the same is also allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 346/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 346 & 347/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Dawoodi Bohra Jamat Committee Anjuman E Ezzi, Takhatpur, Bilaspur vs. CIT(Exemption), Bhopal

ITA 130/RPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 130/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2025-26)

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Application)For Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13Section 13(1)(b)

matter, therefore, is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. 11. Needless to say, reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be provided to the assessee in the set side proceedings. The assessee is directed to cooperate and assist proactively in the set aside proceedings, 8 Dawoodi

Mintu Rani, Patna vs. Assessement Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

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

ITA 16/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 250

Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide appeal number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069009534(1), dated 24-09-2024, has dismissed the appeal of the appellant without allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard. The appellate order is deemed to have been served on 24-09-2024, itself on the day of passing of the order ... action of the AO in arbitrarily passing ex-party order I.T.A. No.: 16/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mintu Rani. without allowing roper opportunity of being heard, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 8. That the whole order passed by the NFAC is bad in facts and law.” 3. Brief facts

Nilu Kumari, Saran vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tx Dptt., Delhi

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

ITA 429/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115Section 115BSection 147Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

well as of the Ld. AO and remit the matter to the Ld. AO to frame the assessment afresh, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter pass an order in accordance with law. The assessee shall not seek unnecessary adjournment and shall be at liberty

Suresh Turyamal Jaswani, Akola vs. ITO Ward-2, Akola

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

ITA 618/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Thakar, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld.Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250

Department under “other head” within 15 days from the date of the order, suffice to say, the Ld. Commissioner shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. The assessee is also directed to file relevant submissions/ documents as would be essentially required. It is clarified that

Sachin Bhandari, Jaipur vs. Itd WD 6(4), Jpr, Jaipur

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

ITA 354/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

without considering the evidences filed. 2 The Ld. AO has erred on facts and in law in passing the above order without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7 Sachin Bhandari 8.2 I have perused the assessment order & material available on record. As regards with the above ... that lis between the parties has to be decided on merits so that nobody’s rights could be scuttled down without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Considering that peculiar aspect of the matter we deem it fit to remand the matter to the file

Asandas & Sons Private Limited, Mehsana vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle- Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1854/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 144C(5)Section 920

Tribunal shall not rest its decision on any other ground unless the party who may be affected thereby has had a sufficient opportunity of being heard on that ground. We are in a situation, in which the assessee has assailed the transfer pricing adjustment in the international transaction of purchase

Dinesh Damodar Shukla, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

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

ITA 891/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)

incomes are exempt in the hands of taxpayer. 4. Appellant contends that the learned CIT(A) ought to have granted appellant a better opportunity of being heard, as none of the notices of hearing issued by the learned CIT(A) had been received on the e-mail ID registered

Adhar Project Welfare Society, Sangli vs. ITO Exemption, Kolhapur

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

ITA 2677/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

basis as a result of such verification thereof. Both the Ld. JAO as well as the assessee shall be allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard and represent the case by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). Needless to say, the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) shall to take into cognizance the audit

Optiva India Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. ACIT, Circle - 2, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 634/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.634/Pun/2022 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani and Ms. Ashwani NalheFor Respondent: Shri Prakash L. Pathade

Section 143(3)

severance pay cost as an operating expense thereby incorrectly recomputing Appellant's operating margin as 12.42% against the correct operating margin of 18.81%. Opportunity of being heard 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO/TPO erred in not providing the computations in relation to various search ... filters applied for companies selected as comparable and thereby depriving the Appellant of any opportunity of being heard in case of any factual error as to such computations, if any. Levy of penalty 11. The Ld. AO has erred in law and in fact by issuing notice for levy