← 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

M/S. Goodluck India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

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

ITA 539/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S. Goodluck India Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, (The Seccessor Entity Of M/S. Ward-18(4), Novalty Enterprises (P) Ltd), New Delhi 509, Arunachal Building, Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacg3204D Assessee By : Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/05/2025

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds

Mayank Jain, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 36(1), ITO, Civic Centre, New Delhi

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

ITA 525/DEL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shri Mayank Jain, Vs. Nfac, 30, Ashoka Park Main, Delhi Rohtak Road, Delhi- 110035 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Amcpj2145F

For Appellant: Shri Manish Uppal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds

Tirupatibaalaji Fiberrs Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 28, New Delhi

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

ITA 484/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S Tirupati Balaji Fibers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 9Th K.M. Stone, Bhopa Road, Central Circle-28, Muzaffarnagar - 251 001. New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb3161E

For Appellant: Shri Anikit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 147

this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds

Indraprastha Logistics Private Limited, Delhi vs. AO, CPC Bengaluru

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

ITA 473/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanestha, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services referred supra. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14/05/2025

Indraprastha Logistics Private Limited, Delhi vs. AO, CPC Banglore

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

ITA 471/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanestha, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services referred supra. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14/05/2025

Adistha Foundation, Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 461/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Adistha Foundation Vs. Cit(Exemption) G-10, Aashish Tower, Civic Centre, Karkardooma Minto Road, Community Centre, New Delhi Anandvihar, Delhi Pan: Aahta7022P Appellant Respondent

Section 80G

remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the application afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Appellant is also at liberty to cure/comply any technical objections if any in the application filed by the Appellant and also produce

Avinash Doda & Associates, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Office, Civic Centre

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

ITA 445/DEL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Avinash Doda & Associates, Vs. Income Tax Officer, House No. 31, Pocket C Sector Ward-28(5), 5, Vasant Kunj, Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abifa0265M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)

this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds

Shri Lal Mahal Agro Products Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Central Circle 32, Delhi

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

ITA 444/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shri Lal Mahal Agro Products Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Nfac, 468-469A, Shop No. 7, Ground Floor, Delhi Lawrence Road, New Delhi-110035 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aalcs2318B

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanestha, Sr. DR
Section 147

appeal to file of Learned NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the Learned NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence

Lalit Aggarwal, Noida vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 433/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shri Lalit Aggarwal, Vs. Ito, A-50, Sector-2, Noida, Up Ward-23(3), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Adppa2960D

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh TiwariFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT (DR)
Section 144Section 148Section 44A

appeal to file of Learned AO for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to furnish fresh evidences and additional grounds, if any, in support of his contentions. Hence, the grounds raised

Shri Nimbark International Social Welfare Trust, Delhi vs. CIT Exemption Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 429/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 429/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2024-25) Shri Nimbark International Vs. Cit(Exemption) Social Welfare Trust Delhi R-52, Gautam Marg, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi Pan:Aaxts1445G Appellant Respondent

Section 12A

remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Sh. Nimbark International Social Welfare Trust Appellant is also at liberty to cure/comply any technical objections if any in the applications filed

Shri Nimbark International Social Welfare Trust, Delhi vs. CIT Exemption Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 428/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 429/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2024-25) Shri Nimbark International Vs. Cit(Exemption) Social Welfare Trust Delhi R-52, Gautam Marg, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi Pan:Aaxts1445G Appellant Respondent

Section 12A

remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(E) with a direction to decide the applications afresh after providing opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. The Sh. Nimbark International Social Welfare Trust Appellant is also at liberty to cure/comply any technical objections if any in the applications filed

Nasiruddin, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Meerut

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

ITA 1233/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year : 2017-18 Nasiruddin, Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), 21/44, Muftivara, Behind Kotwali, Meerut Meerut (Pan: Avnpn6331P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Rohit Agarwal, Ca Respondent By : Sh. Ram Kishan Meena, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.05.2025 Order Per Shamim Yahya, Am : This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.01.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi On The Following Grounds:- That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & The Facts Of The Case By 1. Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Appellant As Barred By Limitation, Ignoring The Request For Condonation Of Delay Of 50 Days In Filing The Appeal As Made During The Course Of Appeal Proceedings. That The Ld. Cit(A) Be Directed To Decide The Appeal Of The 2. Appellant On Merits. That The Ao & Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts Of The Case By 3. Charging Income Tax U/S. 115Bbe, Which Was Introduced By Taxation

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ram Kishan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 69A

canvass his case before the AO and accordingly, AO may be directed to decide the issues in dispute afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard. Ld. Sr. DR did not controvert the aforesaid proposition. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Upon careful consideration ... dispute to the 2 | P a g e file of the AO with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SRBHATNAGAR

Shiva Trading, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-36(4), Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 4291/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shiva Trading Vs. Ito Flat No. 652, 2Nd Floor, Ward-36(4) Creative Heights, Sector- New Delhi 29, Rohini, New Delhi Pan: Acqfs1603K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Advocate Paritosh Jain Revenue By Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/05/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal

Section 139Section 44A

case, NFAC has erred, both of facts and in law, in passing the order without giving assessee an appropriate and adequate opportunity of being heard in violation of the principle of natural justice. (ii) That the reason for non appearance before the NFAC was beyond the control of the assessee ... Assessee filed an application for condonation of delay contending that the order impugned has been passed filed by the NFAC without giving opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and the Assessee came to know regarding passing of the order impugned only in the month of July, whenthe new Accountant

Trilok Singh Bhandari Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward Exemption 2(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3211/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 249(2)Section 249(3)

matter may be remitted back to the ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh on merits with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee

Trilok Singh Bhandari Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward Exemption 2(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3210/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 249(2)Section 249(3)

matter may be remitted back to the ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh on merits with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee

Ajay Kumar Khurana, New Delhi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2666/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumar[Assessment Year : 2015-16] Ajay Kumar Khurana Vs Pr.Cit-20 37-B, Pocket-Iv New Delhi Mayur Vihar, Phase-I Delhi-110091 Pan-Aagpk1260N Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms.Monika Ghai, Adv. Shri Sharad Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Dipanshu Agarwal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.05.2025

Section 147Section 263

erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, then he may (after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such inquiry as he deems necessary), pass such order thereon as the circumstances of the case

Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hissar vs. ITO, Exemption, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2225/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year 2018-19]

Section 10Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

absence of which, the above transactions carried out by the assessee remained unsubstantiated as per the AO. Thus, an opportunity of being heard as per provision of section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was provided to the assessee by the AO with the prior approval from

ACIT, Circle 22(2), New Delhi vs. Shridham Distributors P.Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 1537/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Acit Vs. Shridham Distributors P. Ltd. Circle 22(2) 52, Ground Floor, Ballram Dey Room No. 225E, C. R. Street, Building, 2Nd Floor, I. P. Kolkta Estate, New Delhi Pan: Aafca0211M

Section 143(3)Section 56Section 68Section 69Section 69C

additions made by the A.O. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass the order afresh in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 8. In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court

Jalandhar Amritsar Tollways Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 13(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1177/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalasstt. Year : 2013-14 Jalandhar Amritsar Tollways Ltd. Vs. Dy Cit, Circle 13(1), 92, 1St Floor, Green Park Extension, Room No. 316A, New Delhi – 16 C.R. Building, (Pan: Aabcj6270F) I.P. Estate, New Delhi-2 / (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Kalyana Sundar, Ca Respondent By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.05.2025 Order Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.10.2019 Passed By The Cit (A), New Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Heard Both The Parties & Perused The Records. 3. At The Outset, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Submitted That Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Passing The Order Without Providing Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Assessee. He Further Submitted That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee On Account Of Non-Prosecution & Even Not Decided The Matter On Merits Of The Case. Hence, It Was Prayed That The Matter May Be Remitted Back To The File Of The Ld. Cit(A) With The Directions To Decide The Issues In Dispute

For Appellant: Sh. Kalyana Sundar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR)

assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-prosecution and even ... with the directions to decide the issues in dispute afresh, on the merits of the case and also provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ld. DR did not controvert the aforesaid proposition. 4. Upon careful consideration, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has not discussed the issues

Narayan Prasad Tripathi, Banda vs. Assessment Unit, New Delhi

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

ITA 185/ALLD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(3)Section 144B

learned CIT(A), both were I.T.A. No.185/Alld/2024 Assessment Year:2021-22 3 passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee. Further, reasonable opportunity of being heard was not provided to the assessee. Learned D.R. for Revenue was in agreement that the issue in dispute regarding various additions may be restored back ... file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In view of the foregoing, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and restored back to the file