“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

Kuldip Kumar Goel, Delhi vs. ACIT(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above

ITA 3285/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanand

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250

Chief Commissioner or 35[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner may 36, after giving the assessee a 12 TA No. 3285/Del/2025 Kuldip Kumar Goel reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, wherever it is possible to do so, and after recording his reasons for doing so, transfer any case36 from ... Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner from whose jurisdiction the case is to be transferred may, after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, wherever it is possible to do so, and after recording his reasons for doing so, pass the order; (b) where

Krishan Kumar Bhatnagar, Ghaziabad vs. The ITO Ward, 2(1)(3), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 2585/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Judicial, Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal, Accountant, Member

Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessee in the grounds of appeal that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO by not providing proper opportunity of being heard as show cause notice was issued on 29.3.2022 and order passed on 30.3.2022. It was further contended that CIT(A) erred in confirming ... were never being served on the assessee. The assessee has not received any notice prior to show cause notice thus, opportunity of being heard is not provided. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper

Yogesh Chadha, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 31(2), Delhi

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

ITA 1498/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2010-11]

Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250

deem it appropriate to remit this matter to ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication de novo in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with statutory notices issued by the ld. First Appellate Authority

Gaurav Kathuria, Rohtak vs. ACIT, Cent Gurgao 1, Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5171/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 153DSection 250

without jurisdiction, as the same has been passed without comply the mandatory condition ie. recording proper reasons and without affording adequate and meaningful opportunity of being heard, in violation of the mandatory provisions of the Act as well as principles of natural justice. Additional Ground No.3: That the notice issued ... accorded for the A.Y. 2017-18 to 2. 2019-20 considering the facts as submitted that - 1. Proper opportunity of being heard was provided to assessee. - 2. All the issues appearing from the material on record were duly examined - 3. Relevant copies of seized documents were verified before passing

Rao Khem Chand Vidya Vihar Shiksha Samiti, Rewari vs. ITO-TDS, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 3856/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 12ASection 191Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)Section 201Section 234ESection 40a

That no prejudice will cause to revenue by admitting these legal grounds, since, the revenue will be having a proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard on these issues. (D). That in the absence of admission of above grounds, the assessee may suffer irreparable loss. (E).It is therefore humbly

Asha Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 30, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2069/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 250Section 69A

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in passing the order without providing proper opportunity of being heard. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte order. 9. On the facts

Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh Firdous Abad Batmuloo Srinagar, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Srinagar Income Tax Office Dhararth Trust Building Srinagar, Srinagar

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

ITA 667/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Udayan Dasguptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.667/Asr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Aijaz Ahmad Sheikh, Ito, Firdous Abad Batmuloo, V Ward-1, Srinagar 190001 S Srinagar Jammu & Kashmir "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bcbps9630N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Virtual Hearing

For Appellant: Sh. P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

appeal before the Tribunal and the main grievance of the Assessee is that he has not been allowed proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard as such he prayed for opportunity of hearing. 8. The ld. DR relied on the orders of the CIT(A) and has raised objections regarding

Mukhtar Ahmad Sheikh, Bandipora vs. ITO Ward 1, Srinagar

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

ITA 271/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Udayan Dasguptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 271/Asr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mukhtar Ahmed Sheikh, Ito, Ward 2, Bandipore V Ward 1, Kashmir 193502 S Srinagar Srinagar "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Virtual Hearing Assessee By : Sh. Revenue By : Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.02.2026

For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 250Section 69

appeal before the Tribunal and the main grievance of the Assessee is that he has not been allowed proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard. He further submitted that since the Assessee was hospitalised and advised bed rest, it was not possible for him to appear for hearing and representing

Anish Vishnoi, Raipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 764/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.764/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Anish Vishnoi New Bus Stand Baloda Bazar, Baloda Bazar S.O., Raipur (C.G.)-493 332 Pan: Aeapv0087J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mahawar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)

Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) providing any detail/documents to the appellant on the basis of which view has been formed and without providing opportunity of being heard or cross examine or verify the said documents. 6. The appellant craves to add alter or delete any of the above grounds

Shri Shyam Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd., Jangir-Champa, Janjgir-Champa vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 55/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.52, 53, 54, 55 & 339/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shri Shyam Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd. Village: Banari, Janjgir, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)-495 668 Pan: Aaocs2467G ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer/Acit-2(1), Ward-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)/Bilaspur ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR &

Section 250

matter came up before the ITAT, it had failed to address the infirmity regarding the fact that the assessee was not afforded proper opportunity of being heard and the matter was dismissed ex-parte by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC which amounted to violation of principles of natural justice ... part of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In light of such decision, the petitioner ought to have been granted an opportunity of being heard which, partakes the characteristic of the fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay

Shri Shyam Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd., Janjgir-Champa vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 54/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR &

Section 250

Shri Shyam Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd., Janjgir-Champa vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 53/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR &

Section 250

Shri Shyam Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd., Janjgir-Champa vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Janjgir-Champa, Janjgir-Champa

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 52/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR &

Section 250

Shri Shyam Oil Extractions Pvt. Ltd., Janjgir, Champa, Janjgir-Champa vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 339/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR &

Section 250

Alhamd Education & Welfare Trust, Hazaribagh vs. ITO - Ward 1(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Hazaribagh

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

ITA 190/RAN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 143(1)Section 250

view that the matter deserves to be restored to the file o the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, we restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal

Rit Incubator Foundation, Uttarakhand vs. CIT Exemption, Lucknow

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

ITA 420/LKW/2024[2024-2025]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow05 Feb 2026AY 2024-2025

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 12ASection 8Section 80G(5)

purely based on surmises and conjecture, without any verification of facts. In our application, we had also mentioned to provide us opportunity of being heard in case of adverse inference. But the AO did not provide us any opportunity to explain the facts and establish the genuineness of the company ... purely based on surmises and conjecture, without any verification of facts. In our application, we had also mentioned to provide us opportunity of being heard in case of adverse inference. But the AO did not provide us any opportunity to explain the facts and establish the genuineness of the company

Kamleshbhai Manubhai Patel, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 814/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 50C

found necessary, the matter may be referred to the Valuation Officer for this purpose. The assessee may also be allowed a proper opportunity of being heard in respect of the sale consideration as determined on the basis of jantri value as on the date of banakhat. In the result

Jalpaiguri Zilla Regulated Market Committee, Jalpaiguri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Jalpaiguri

Accordingly, ITA No. 2763/Kol/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2797/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 271A

under section 10(26AAB) afresh by consider the Notification dated 17.10.2014 and other supporting documents and pass a speaking order after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, ITA No. 2763/Kol/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. ITA Nos. 2764 & 2765/Kol/2025

Sonali Ghosh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 25(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2782/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2782/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sonali Ghosh..…………………..………………....…………………....Appellant 297, Parnashree Pally, South Kolkata, Kol-700060.. [Pan: Auzpg3241N] Vs. Ito, Ward-25(1), Kolkata ...…….……....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rana Dey Office Staff Of Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumitra Ghosh, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 04, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 05, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 12.09.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. The Assessing Officer Passed Assessment Order Under Section 147 Read With Section 144B Of The Act Whereby Making Addition Of Rs.12,19,330/- In The Hands Of The Assessee. 3. The Appellate Order Was Passed Ex Parte On Account Of Alleged Non-Compliance & The Ld. Cit (A) Sustained The Order Of The Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Assessee Is In Appeal Before This Tribunal. At The Time Of The Hearing The Ld. Ar Submitted

Section 144BSection 147Section 250

submitted I.T.A. No.2782/Kol/2025 Sonali Ghosh that the impugned assessment order is bad in law, having been passed without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and without examining the issues on merits. It was further submitted that the assessee could not effectively represent its case due to genuine difficulties and, therefore ... matter to the file of the Learned CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issue afresh on merits, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with all notices and file necessary details as may be required

Jalpaiguri Zilla Regulated Market Committee, Jalpaiguri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Jalpaiguri

Accordingly, ITA No. 2763/Kol/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2763/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 271A