← 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

Osuran Rajamanickam, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kancheepuram

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

ITA 871/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.871/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Osuran Rajamanickam, Income Tax Officer, No.1/A, Magalai Street, Ward-2, Mudichur Road , Old Perungalathur, Kanchipuram. Chennai-600 063. [Pan: Bzbpr0488N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Ms.Joshita Jothi, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gautham S.Mukundan, Irs सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Ms.Joshita Jothi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.Gautham S.Mukundan, IRS

/Chny/2025 Ld.First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the addition by passing an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of Ld.AO for readjudication. The Ld. Counsel assured that ... placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued

Vilvathulasih Trust, Coimbatore vs. Assistant Commissioner Income Tax (Exemptions), Coimbatore

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

ITA 777/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 776 & 777/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2024-25 Vilvathulasih Trust, Assistant Commissioner Of No.189, Sakthi Road, Ganapathy Pudur, Income Tax (Exemptions), Gnapathy, Coimbatore, Coimbatore. Tamil Nadu- 641 006. [Pan: Aadtv7974K) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri G.Vishnu Manickam, C.A, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri G.Nandha Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri G.Vishnu Manickam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G.Nandha Kumar, CIT
Section 80G

Counsel for the assessee through its grounds of appeal in ITA Nos.776 & 777 argued that the appellant has not been accorded a fair opportunity of being heard before taking an adverse decision in its case. The Ld. Counsel argued that the statutory Page - 2 - of 4 ITA Nos. 776 & 777/Chny/2025 ... twin appeals back to the Ld.PCIT(E ) for readjudication of the matter after Page - 3 - of 4 ITA Nos. 776 & 777/Chny/2025 providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with all the statutory notices issued by the Ld.PCIT

Vilvathulasih Trust, Coimbatore vs. Assistant Commissioner (Exemptions), Coimbatore

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

ITA 776/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 776 & 777/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2024-25 Vilvathulasih Trust, Assistant Commissioner Of No.189, Sakthi Road, Ganapathy Pudur, Income Tax (Exemptions), Gnapathy, Coimbatore, Coimbatore. Tamil Nadu- 641 006. [Pan: Aadtv7974K) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri G.Vishnu Manickam, C.A, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri G.Nandha Kumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri G.Vishnu Manickam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G.Nandha Kumar, CIT
Section 80G

Counsel for the assessee through its grounds of appeal in ITA Nos.776 & 777 argued that the appellant has not been accorded a fair opportunity of being heard before taking an adverse decision in its case. The Ld. Counsel argued that the statutory Page - 2 - of 4 ITA Nos. 776 & 777/Chny/2025 ... twin appeals back to the Ld.PCIT(E ) for readjudication of the matter after Page - 3 - of 4 ITA Nos. 776 & 777/Chny/2025 providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with all the statutory notices issued by the Ld.PCIT

Harsh Vidyarthi, Bhopal vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai

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

ITA 326/CHNY/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.326/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Harsh Vidyarthi, Assistant Commissioner Of Flat No.3A Rosemere Third Floor, Income Tax, No.18 Harrington Road, Chetpet, Central Circle-2(3), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan: Abwpv4268J] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Deepak Arora, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 148

outset the Ld.Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the ex parte order of the Ld.AO without giving due opportunity of being heard. It was contended that the assessee has all the information in its possession now to defend the additions. Accordingly, request was made ... Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216 on the subject matter. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Any non- compliance