← 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

Krishna Pharma Distributors, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 22(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 859/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.856/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.857/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.858/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.859/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) Krishna Pharma Distributors Vs Ito, Ward-22(2), Kolkata Ground Floor, Gandhi Building 44, Ezra Street, Bagri Market, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aajfk 8757 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओि से /Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar िाजस्व की ओि से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 16.08.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018- 2019. 2. Shri Miraj D Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Out, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee On Account Of Delay. It Was The Submission That In The Statement Of Facts, The Assessee Has Provided The Reasons For Delay. However, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Considered The Same. It Was Also Submitted That The Delay May Kindly Be Condoned & The 2

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

issues in all the appeals to the file of Id. CIT(A) for readjudicating the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Thus, all the four appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 3 ITA No.856-859/Kol/2025 6. In the result, appeals of assessee

Krishna Pharma Distributors, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 22(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 858/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.856/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.857/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.858/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.859/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) Krishna Pharma Distributors Vs Ito, Ward-22(2), Kolkata Ground Floor, Gandhi Building 44, Ezra Street, Bagri Market, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aajfk 8757 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओि से /Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar िाजस्व की ओि से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 16.08.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018- 2019. 2. Shri Miraj D Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Out, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee On Account Of Delay. It Was The Submission That In The Statement Of Facts, The Assessee Has Provided The Reasons For Delay. However, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Considered The Same. It Was Also Submitted That The Delay May Kindly Be Condoned & The 2

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

issues in all the appeals to the file of Id. CIT(A) for readjudicating the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Thus, all the four appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 3 ITA No.856-859/Kol/2025 6. In the result, appeals of assessee

Krishna Pharma Distributors, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 22(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 857/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.856/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.857/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.858/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.859/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) Krishna Pharma Distributors Vs Ito, Ward-22(2), Kolkata Ground Floor, Gandhi Building 44, Ezra Street, Bagri Market, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aajfk 8757 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओि से /Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar िाजस्व की ओि से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 16.08.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018- 2019. 2. Shri Miraj D Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Out, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee On Account Of Delay. It Was The Submission That In The Statement Of Facts, The Assessee Has Provided The Reasons For Delay. However, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Considered The Same. It Was Also Submitted That The Delay May Kindly Be Condoned & The 2

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

issues in all the appeals to the file of Id. CIT(A) for readjudicating the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Thus, all the four appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 3 ITA No.856-859/Kol/2025 6. In the result, appeals of assessee

Krishna Pharma Distributors, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 22(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 856/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.856/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.857/Kol/2025(Ay: 2017-18) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.858/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.859/Kol/2025(Ay: 2018-19) Krishna Pharma Distributors Vs Ito, Ward-22(2), Kolkata Ground Floor, Gandhi Building 44, Ezra Street, Bagri Market, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aajfk 8757 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओि से /Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar िाजस्व की ओि से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders All Dated 16.08.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018- 2019. 2. Shri Miraj D Shah, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Out, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee On Account Of Delay. It Was The Submission That In The Statement Of Facts, The Assessee Has Provided The Reasons For Delay. However, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Considered The Same. It Was Also Submitted That The Delay May Kindly Be Condoned & The 2

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

issues in all the appeals to the file of Id. CIT(A) for readjudicating the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Thus, all the four appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 3 ITA No.856-859/Kol/2025 6. In the result, appeals of assessee

Amit Kumar Sen, Hooghly vs. ACIT, Circle 23(1), Hooghly

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

ITA 388/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.388/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Amit Kumar Sen, Vs Acit, Circle-23(1), Hooghly Sahapur, Tarakeswar, Hooghly (Wb)-712410 Pan No. :Aavfs 6967 R (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ars रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Addl/Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 27.12.2024 Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1071619653(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ld. Ars Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Was Specifically Asked To Point Out How The Assessee Has Responded To The Chart Issued By The Assessing Officer, Which Is Recorded In Page 3 Of The Assessment Order. Other Than Referring To Various Replies That Have Been Filed By The Assessee, Which Were Uploaded From The Portal, No Specific Reply To The Said Para Was Pointed Out. Admittedly, The Assessee Has Not Been Able To Dislodge The Said Chart.

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Ray, Shri S.N.Patra and Shri Trideep Nayak, ArsFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Addl/CIT-Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for readjudication afresh after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 19 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced

Dishari Social Welfare and Development Trust, Dubrajpur vs. CIT(Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 220/KOL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.220/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2023-2024) Dishari Social Welfare & Vs Cit(Exemption), Kolkata Development Trust, Nutanpally, Dubrajpur, Wb Pan No. :Aabtd 8637 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.02.2024 Of The Ld. Cit(Exemption), Kolkata, For The Assessment Year 2023-2024. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Raja Sengputa, Ld. Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Time Barred By 272 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay. Though Affidavit Justifying The Delay Of 272 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Not Placed In The File, However, The Same Is Uploaded In The E-Filing Portal Of The Tribunal. The Reasons Given In The Affidavit Seem To Be Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Therefore, Considering The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, We Condone The Delay Of 272 Days & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Admitted For Hearing.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR

justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld.CIT(E) for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25/06/2025. (SANJAY AWASTHI

Wavoo Real Estate Corporation, Chennai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai

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

ITA 764/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.762, 763 & 764/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 & S.A. Nos. 52, 53 & 54/Chny/2025 [In I.T.A. Nos.762, 763 & 764/Chny/2025] Wavoo Real Estate Corporation, Vs. The Dcit/Assistant Commissioner Of Wavoo Mansion, 48/39, Rajaji Salai, Income Tax, 1St Floor, Room No. 106, Mannady, Non Corporate Ward 12(1), Chennai 600 001. Chennai. [Pan:Aaafw0270G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Stay Applications Are Filed By The Petitioner Seeking Grant Of Stay From Recovery Of Outstanding Disputed Demand Of ₹.1,07,85,566/- For Ay 2013-14, ₹.2,61,518/- For Ay 2014-15 & ₹.13,88,831/- For Ay 2016-17 Till The Final Disposal Of The Appeals Filed By The Petitioner.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194I

date of receipt of this order and the assessee shall produce the receipt before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall allow reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. I.T.A. Nos. 763 & 764/Chny/2025