← 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

Vattamalai Rathinasamy Anguraj, Tiruppur vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 458/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.458/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Vattamalai Rathinasamy Anguraj, Income Tax Officer, No.170, Vattamalai, Vattamalai Ward-2(1) Tiruppur, Avanashipalayampudur B.O. Tiruppur, Tamil Nadu-638 701. [Pan: Ahipa5395F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri S.Bhupendran, Advocate(Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gowthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri S.Bhupendran, Advocate(Virtual)For Respondent: Ms.Gowthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144Section 69A

assessee submitted that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the addition by passing an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. The Ld.AR pleaded that the assessee was not able to make the timely compliances on account of unfortunate demise of his brother in road ... 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

Abuthahir Safiullah, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-12(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 449/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.449/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12 Abuthahir Safiullah, Income Tax Officer, No.53/27, Thambu Chetty Street, Non-Corp Ward-12(1)-Che, Mannady, Chennai-600 001. Chennai. [Pan: Avkps7876B] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Murali, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Murali, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144

assessee submitted that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the addition by passing an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. The Ld.AR pleaded that they were not aware of the statutory notices issued online as they are not adequately conversant with electronic working ... 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

Knm Charities, the Nilgiris vs. CIT, Exmeptions, Chennai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpuses

ITA 448/CHNY/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.448/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: - Knm Charities, Commissioner Of Income Tax Knm Compound, (Exemption), Ooty Road Coonoor, Chennai. The Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu-643 102. [Pan: Aaatk2879B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri H.Yeshwanth Kumar, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gowthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri H.Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Ms.Gowthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 12A

Form-10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB for non-appearance. The Ld.AR submitted that it was provided only one hearing notice and thus adequate opportunity of being heard was not provided. It was urged that one last opportunity be provided and that due compliance shall be made now. The Ld.Counsel gave ... admitted fact the assessee has not complied with statutory notices even though only one was issued. Electronic governance systems apart, adequate opportunity of being heard is natural right of every litigant and cannot be taken away. Revenue may consider modifying its electronic governance system so that such handicaps

Sivaji, Ramnad vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ramnad

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

ITA 399/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.399/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Sivaji, Income Tax Officer, No.5/199, Sowkat Ali Street, Ward-2, Ramnad, Paramakudi, Ramnad, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-623 707. [Pan: Acyps0525L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R.Meenakshisundaram, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri R.Meenakshisundaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 154Section 68

outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It has been stated that the accountant could not guide him properly leading to the deficient compliances. The Ld. Counsel therefore requested that ... Accordingly, Page - 3 - of 4 we set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and direct him to readjudicate the matter after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and by way of a speaking order. The assessee shall comply with all the statutory notices and any non-compliance

Sivanandam Sankar, Salem vs. ACIT, Circle-I, Hosur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 396/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.396/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Sivanandam Sankar, Assistant Commissioner Of No.3/2-B Sanyasigundu Road, Income Tax, Kitchipalayam, Salem, Circle-1, Tamil Nadu-636 001 Hosur. [Pan: Awgps5742P] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri N.Chandrasekar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri N.Chandrasekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 69A

assessee submitted that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the addition by passing an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. The Ld.AR pleaded that the assessee admittedly, on account of personal reasons, could not make timely compliances to the statutory notices. It was stated ... 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

G. Ramachandran, Cuddalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3194/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3194/Chny/2024 Assessment Years: 2012-13 G.Ramachandran, Income Tax Officer, No.9 Pazhani Nagar, Padirikuppam Post, Che-W-(181)(1), Kuthapakkam, Cuddalore, Chennai. Tamil Nadu-607 002. [Pan: Avfpr5530G] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144Section 69A

assessee submitted that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the addition by passing an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. The Ld.AR pleaded that the assessee admittedly, on account of personal reasons, could not make timely compliances to the statutory notices. It was stated ... 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