“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

Sukanti Educational and Charitable Trust, Sonepur vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Sambalpur

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

ITA 51/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 57

hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the Ld. AO to frame the assessment de novo after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering the evidence filed by the assessee in support of the claim of expenditure incurred for earning the income

Urmila Kishan, Angul vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)

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

ITA 191/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

24/1061344475(1) dated 22/02/2024) However, while passing the order AO has not consider the replies and pass the adverse order without giving the opportunity of being heard. All this goes to support the contentions of the appellant that AO has passed the order on the basis of mere conjectures ... documents filed viz. the audit reports and other evidence in support of the reliefs. Claimed. The Ld. CIT(A) shall allow an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also grant an opportunity of representing the case and to be heard to the Ld. AO as per rule

Bandhu N G O, Keonjhar vs. Commissioner-of-Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad

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

ITA 102/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

Exemption) is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to him for deciding the application afresh after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering the reply which may be filed and thereafter pass a speaking order in accordance with law. 6. In the result

Sourabh Kumar Vishamvar Singh, Adajan Surat vs. ITO Ward 2(5), Income Tax Office, Court Area, Near Jamui More

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

ITA 331/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Through Virtual Hearing At Kolkata) Sourabh Kumar Vishamvar Vs Ito, Ward-2(5), Near Jamui Singh, More, Lakhisarai, A-301, Keshav Complex, Bihar Honey Park Road, Adjan, Surat Gujarat-395009 Pan No. :Cgspk 5166 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mehul Shah, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna, Dated 18.09.2023 Passed For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Making Addition Of Rs. 24,00,000/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S. 68 Of The I.T Act, 1961. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Taxing The Addition By Taking The Rate @77.25% By Attracting S. 115Bbe Instead Of Normal Tax Rate. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Taxing The Income U/S 115Bbe @ 77.25% In A Retrospective Manner By Applying The Duly Substituted S.115Bbe Inserted Retroactive Instead Of Taxing It At 35.54% As Per The Old Provisions Of S.115Bbe.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT

Section 115BSection 68

aside and the matter is remanded back to the file of AO to examine the issue afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, the assessee is directed to cooperate with the AO and place all the relevant documents before the AO, failing

Sivaji Raju Bellamkonda, Vijayawada vs. Ward3(3)-ITO, Vijayawada

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

ITA 162/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 143(3)Section 69

same and we direct the Ld. AO to verify the additional evidences submitted by the assessee as per law after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In view of the above, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back

Central Government Pensioners Association Kerala, Thrissur vs. CIT (Exemption), Kochi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 151/COCH/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Years: 2024-25 Central Government Pensioners Cit(Exemption), Kochi Association Kerala V.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR

Section 12A

remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to re-examine the issue afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 12.06.2025. (Inturi Rama

Sreekumara Samajam, Thrissur vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Thrissur

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

ITA 1116/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Years: 2016-17 Sreekumara Samajam Ito, Exemption Ward, V. Thrissur Xxi/230 S Paliyamthuruth Anapuzha, Kodungallur Thrissur-680667, Kerala. Pan : Aafts2292H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Smt. Nivedita A Kamath, Adv. Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Snr Ar. Date Of Hearing : 05.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2025 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.11.2024 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2016–17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Registered As A Society Under The Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific & Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955, On 02.07.2009. It Is Also Registered Under Section 12A Of The Act With The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Thrissur & Claimed To Function As A Religious & Charitable Society. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2016–17 Declaring ‘Nil’ Income. The Assessee Was Engaged In Conducting Kuri Business & Money-Lending Business

For Appellant: Smt. Nivedita A Kamath, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR

Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the CIT(A)’s order is bad in law as it was passed without granting reasonable opportunity of being heard, especially after a specific request was made for virtual hearing. The assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from making a full and proper ... authorities are expected to provide the assessee with a fair and effective hearing. As held in several judicial precedents, 4 Sreekumara Samajam opportunity of being heard is integral to the principle of natural justice, and its denial renders the order unsustainable. In the present case, we find merit

Manoj Khana, Shahjahanpur vs. Income Tax Officer-I(4), Shahjahanpur

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

ITA 199/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 69A

learned CIT(A) and we direct the learned CIT(A) to pass de novo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. (E) In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court

U.P.Rajya Nirman Sahkari Sangh Ltd, Lucknow vs. Dy. CIT, Range-2, Lucknow

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

ITA 252/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)

direction to provide further opportunity to the assessee and to pass order afresh on this issue in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to the Assessing Officer. 6. Grounds no. 5 & 6 are related to disallowance of belated EPF contribution. The learned

Shree Ayappa Seva Samajam Trust, Nashik vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 484/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrashree Ayappa Seva Samajam Trust Cit (Exemption), Pune Plot No.67, Survey No.484, Opp. Indian Vs. Petrol Pump, Trimbak Road, Satpur, Nashik – 422007 Pan: Aants4413J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Abhay Avchat Department By : Shri Vishwas S. Mundhe Date Of Hearing : 11-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-06-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas S. Mundhe

Section 124(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

registration granted under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should not be cancelled. The assessee was also given opportunity of being heard vide the said notice. The assessee was specifically informed that in the event of failure to comply by the due date, the application shall be liable ... assessee through e-portal and email. However, the assessee neither submitted explanation to the show cause notice till date nor availed the opportunity of being heard. 6. Since, the assessee has not furnished any explanation to the discrepancies communicated to it, it is presumed that the assessee has nothing

Nashik Malayalee Cultural Association, Nashik vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 483/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas S. Mundhe

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Nashik Malayalee Cultural Association, Nashik vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 482/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas S. Mundhe

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

Baburao Chandere Social Foundation, Pune vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 389/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrababurao Chandere Social Foundation Cit (Exemption), Pune 3Rd Floor, Flat No.301, 1 Wing, Sr. Vs. No.89, Uthrika Veerbhadra Nagar, Baner, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaeab4179N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvraj Chavan Department By : Shri Sandeep Sengupta, Cit Date Of Hearing : 05-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-06-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: S/Shri B C Malakar and Yuvraj ChavanFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Sengupta, CIT

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

file of the Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to adjudicate the issue afresh and in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result

DCIT, Swargate Pune vs. Grihum Housing Finance Limited, Pune

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1883/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Mutha and Abhilash HiranFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(1)Section 2(91)Section 36(1)(va)

Ground 3: Impugned adjustment to applicable rate of tax is bad-in-law in absence of providing an opportunity of being heard. 3.1 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO (CPC) erred in adjusting/modifying the applicable rate of tax by not providing ... opportunity of being heard, being in violation of the first proviso to section 143(1), thereby rendering the intimation passed under section 143(1) invalid and bad-in-law. 7. The Ld. DR while justifying the adjustment made by the CPC submitted that the turnover or gross receipts from core

Prabhat Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patnsanstha Maryadit Tadwadi, Raigad vs. ITO, Ward 3, Panvel

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

ITA 1433/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Akash KumarFor Respondent: Shri Vishal Makawane

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 44ASection 44BSection 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

adjustment contemplated u/s 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act. (iii) There is no need for again giving an opportunity of being heard as regards the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the Act, as this is mechanical exercise as held by Hon'ble Madras High Court in AA520 Veerappampalayam

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Sanjay Chowdary Gaddipati, Hyderabad

ITA 376/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54FSection 54F(4)

Rs.4,24,08,090/-. Needless to say, the A.O. shall in the course of the set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee who shall remain at liberty to substantiate his claim based on fresh documentary evidence, if any. 18. Before parting, we may herein

Kalinga Institute of Mining Engineering and Technology Trust, Angul vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1357/HYD/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025AY 2025-26

For Appellant: C.A. Ambika MohantyFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 115TSection 12A

preferred the present appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that the cancellation order has been passed without giving proper and effective opportunity of being heard. The assessee had not received the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(E) during the cancellation proceedings. As such, the assessee could not appear ... above, and bearing in mind the principles of natural justice, we are of the considered view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to be heard and to file necessary documentary support for continuation of its registration u/s.12AB. Accordingly, we remand the matter to the file

Sri Maheswari Dharmsala, Kolkata vs. CIT, (Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 528/KOL/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

final registration is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to him for deciding the application afresh after granting another opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall not seek unnecessary adjournments and shall file the required details, which shall be considered while deciding the application

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Udupi, Uupi vs. Kambadakone Rytara Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd, Udupi

ITA 1930/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 194A(3)Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

operative society, the whole of such income is eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Needless to say a reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to submit all the relevant details as well as the breakups

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Udupi vs. Kambadakone Rytara Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd, Uppunda

ITA 1929/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Mahesh R Uppin, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 194A(3)(v)Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

ITA Nos.1929 & 1930/Bang/2024 KambadakoneRytaraSevaSahakariSangha Ltd., Uppunda IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A"BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU