← 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

Nasimben Sadikbhai Kotadia, Bhanvad vs. Income Tax Officer, Dwarka

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

ITA 72/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.72/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) Nasimben Sadikbhai Kotadia Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Sahmandli Vistar, Post At- Bhanvad, Dwarka-361335 Jamnagar-361 010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bphpk6343B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 11/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. Arjunlal Saini Am; Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Vide Order Dated 20/01/2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Dated 28/12/2017, U/S 143(3) Rw.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee Nor Filed Any Application For Adjournment Despite Issuance Of Notice For Hearing, On The Address Given By The Assessee, In Form-36 & Ld.Senior Departmental Representative For The Respondent / Revenue Was Present. In Absence Of Any Application Filed By The Assessee / Appellant, The Appeal Is Disposed Of Ex Parte, After Hearing Ld.Sr-Dr On Merits In Terms Of Rule 24 Of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter ... back to the file of Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest her stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order

Lalitaben Vikas Foundation, Rajkot vs. ITO Exemption WD 1, Rajkot

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

ITA 882/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.882/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Lalitaben Vikas Foundation, Income Tax Officer, C/O Charma Shilp, Ward-1(Exemption), New Aaykar Bhawan, Vs Rajkot-360 001 Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aaatl2672 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri G.R. Sanghavi, Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. Arjunlal Saini Am; Captioned Appeal Filed By Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017- 18, Is Directed Against Order Passed By Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Mumbai, Vide Order Dated 04.10.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Center (Cpc), Bangalore/Assessing Officer Dated 09.03.2019 U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset Itself, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Assailed The Impugned Order By Contending That The Assessee Could Not Represent His Case Before Ld. Cit(A) & The Order Being An Ex-Parte Order, Stood Vitiated On Account Of Violation Of Principle Of Natural Justice. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee, Submitted That There Was Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) By 44 Days. The Assessee Has Explained The Reasons Of Such Delay & Sufficient Cause For Such Delay, Stating That Assessment Order Itself Was Not Received On Time

For Appellant: Shri G.R. Sanghavi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest its case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter ... back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order

Abhishek Doriwala, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(1), Surat

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

ITA 1372/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1372/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Abhishek Doriwala Vs. Assessing Unit, 33/A, Plot No. 88, China Gate- 2, Income Tax Department, Behind Gayatri Mandir, Near Drb Jurisdiction College, Surat- 395007 Ito, Ward-1(2)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aokpd2241J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri P M Jagasheth , Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/04/2025

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

been adhered to the instant case. It is settled law that principles of natural justice require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to present his case. Therefore, without delving much into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter ... back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to furnish its submission and relevant details/documents before the CIT(A). For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee