← 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

Gopal Ji Mishra, Lucknow vs. ITO-6(5), Lucknow

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

ITA 349/LKW/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2013-14 Gopal Ji Mishra V. The Income Tax Officer 6(5) K-1218, Ashiana Lucknow - New Kanpur Road, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Akjpm8317M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18 03 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 03 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 69A

justified in dismissing the appeal in limine by passing the impugned order ex-parte without affording due and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2.2 BECAUSE various notices issued by the authorities below could not be responded to by the assessee due to illness/non-accessibility of registered e-mail ... deserves to be set-aside and matter restored to the file of Assessing Officer for passing the assessment order afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. ITA No.349/LKW/2024 Page 4 of 9 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO AFORESAID 3. BECAUSE the Assessing Officer was not correct in making

Shravan Seva Foundation, Vadodara vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2163/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.2163/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : Na Shravan Seva Foundation The Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ 18, Kishan Complex Ahmedabad – 380 015 V/S. Opp. Yash Complex Subhanpura Vadodara – 390 023 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abgcs 8130 B (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket Bakshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri A.P. Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(E)"], Dated 21/11/2024, Rejecting The Assessee’S Application For Registration Under Section 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"].

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Bakshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 8Section 80GSection 80G(5)

learned CIT erred in fact and in law in rejecting the application for registration u/s. 80G of the Act without giving a proper opportunity of being heard. 3. Your Appellant craves the right to add, to alter, to substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds ... Shravan Seva Foundation vs. CIT(E) 3 settled principle of law that no adverse order should be passed without granting a proper opportunity of being heard. In this case, the assessee contends that it was not aware of the notices due to issues with email access and that no specific

Seva Samajik Vikas Sanstha, Satara vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 592/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraseva Samajit Vikas Sanstha Satara Cit (Exemption), Pune 13, Shrinagar Colony, Koregaon Road, Vs. Sangamnagar, Satara – 415004 Pan: Aaxts1872M (Appellant) (Respondent) Seva Samajit Vikas Sanstha Satara Cit (Exemption), Pune 13, Shrinagar Colony, Koregaon Road, Vs. Sangamnagar, Satara – 415004 Pan: Aaxts1872M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Yuvraj Hanmant Bhandvalkar Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, Cit Date Of Hearing : 17-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-03-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Yuvraj Hanmant BhandvalkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

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

R G Developers, Pune vs. Commissioner Income Tax Officer, Circle 7, Pune

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

ITA 184/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

assessee to substantiate its case by filing requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to make its submissions, if any, before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) on the appointed date ... have already restored the issue back to the file of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) for deciding the same after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, we restore the issue in ITA No.184/PUN/2025 to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same after

R G Developers, Pune vs. Commissioner Income Tax Officer, Circle 7, Pune

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

ITA 183/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

assessee to substantiate its case by filing requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to make its submissions, if any, before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) on the appointed date ... have already restored the issue back to the file of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) for deciding the same after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, we restore the issue in ITA No.184/PUN/2025 to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same after

Learning Temple Education Foundation, Nashik vs. CIT(Eexmption), Pune

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

ITA 2564/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Vaibhav R ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

directly relevant to the present proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above including an opportunity of being heard. 6. Thus, the assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income

Learning Temple Education Foundation, Nashik vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 2563/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Vaibhav R ChauguleFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

directly relevant to the present proceedings. However, the assessee has failed to comply despite giving sufficient opportunities as discussed above including an opportunity of being heard. 6. Thus, the assessee has failed to furnish the details called for under the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income

Seva Samajik Vikas Sanstha, Satara vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 2326/PUN/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraseva Samajit Vikas Sanstha Satara Cit (Exemption), Pune 13, Shrinagar Colony, Koregaon Road, Vs. Sangamnagar, Satara – 415004 Pan: Aaxts1872M (Appellant) (Respondent) Seva Samajit Vikas Sanstha Satara Cit (Exemption), Pune 13, Shrinagar Colony, Koregaon Road, Vs. Sangamnagar, Satara – 415004 Pan: Aaxts1872M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Yuvraj Hanmant Bhandvalkar Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, Cit Date Of Hearing : 17-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-03-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Yuvraj Hanmant BhandvalkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

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

Shri Ganapati Devasthan Trust, Baramati vs. DCIT(Exemption Circle), Pune

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

ITA 2313/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Ganapati Devasthan Trust Dcit Siddheshwar Galli, Baramati, Vs. (Exemption Circle), Maharashtra – 413102 Pune Pan: Aants4193D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sharad A Vaze Department By : Shri Ambarnath Bhimrao Khule (Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 03-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-03-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A VazeFor Respondent: Shri Ambarnath Bhimrao Khule
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 147Section 148

file of the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A) for adjudication of the issue on merit and as per fact and 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

Randive Builders and Developers, Maharashtra vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kolhapur

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

ITA 1833/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139(4)Section 154Section 69C

verification at the level of the Assessing Officer, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per fact and law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed ... this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding the issue afresh and as per fact and law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 16. In the result, both the appeals filed

Shri Abhijit Uttamrao Deshmukh, Beed vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Aurangabad

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

ITA 1666/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JhaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

NFAC with a direction to decide the penalty appeal after the quantum appeal is decided. Needless to say, he shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to participate in the appellate proceedings

Seema Sunil Bagul, Nashik vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Nashik.

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

ITA 1648/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

direction to verify the details and pass appropriate order as per fact and law. Needless to say the Assessing Officer shall grant 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. 11. Identical grounds

Seema Sunil Bagul, Nashik vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Nashik.

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

ITA 1647/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

direction to verify the details and pass appropriate order as per fact and law. Needless to say the Assessing Officer shall grant 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. 11. Identical grounds

Seema Sunil Bagul, Nashik vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Nashik.

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

ITA 1646/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

direction to verify the details and pass appropriate order as per fact and law. Needless to say the Assessing Officer shall grant 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. 11. Identical grounds

Randive Builders and Developers, Maharashtra vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kolhapur

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

ITA 1378/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139(4)Section 154Section 69C

verification at the level of the Assessing Officer, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per fact and law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed ... this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding the issue afresh and as per fact and law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 16. In the result, both the appeals filed

Balaji Industral Corporation Limited, Nellore vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Nellore

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

ITA 64/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

after considering the relevant facts and evidence to be produced by the assessee. Needless to say that the assessee be given an appropriate opportunity of being heard before passing the fresh order. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open

(Late) Laxman Rao Banapuram Rep by L/R B Rama Devi, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-2018 is dismissed

ITA 603/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA KA Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 142Section 153ASection 54F

because the Assessing Officer has correctly followed the procedure enshrined in section 142(2A) by providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, before forming his opinion on books of accounts and complexity involved in the books maintained by the assessee. 9 ITA.Nos.601, 602 & 603/Hyd./2022 Therefore, there

(Late) Laxman Rao Banapuram, Rep by L/R B Rama Devi, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-2018 is dismissed

ITA 602/HYD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA KA Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 142Section 153ASection 54F

because the Assessing Officer has correctly followed the procedure enshrined in section 142(2A) by providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, before forming his opinion on books of accounts and complexity involved in the books maintained by the assessee. 9 ITA.Nos.601, 602 & 603/Hyd./2022 Therefore, there

(Late) Laxman Rao Banapuram Rep by L/R B Rama Devi, Hyderabad vs. DCIT-Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-2018 is dismissed

ITA 601/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA KA Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 142Section 153ASection 54F

because the Assessing Officer has correctly followed the procedure enshrined in section 142(2A) by providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, before forming his opinion on books of accounts and complexity involved in the books maintained by the assessee. 9 ITA.Nos.601, 602 & 603/Hyd./2022 Therefore, there

Life Saving Society of India, Kolkata vs. I.T.O. (Exemption), Ward - 1(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 2366/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2365/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 & I.T.A. No. 2366/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016

Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before