← 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

Baskaran T Thangappan, Sirkali vs. ITO, Ward-1, Nagapattinam

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

ITA 3166/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3166/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Baskaran T.Thangappan, Income Tax Officer, 8/1, West Mada Vilagam Street, Vs. Ward-1 Sirkali-609 110. Nagapattinam. Pan: Albpb-5046-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per George George K: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Cit(A) - Nfac Order Dated 28.08.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2016-17. 2. There Is A Delay Of 42 Days In Filing This Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein The Reasons For Belated Filing Of This Appeal & Also A Supporting Affidavit. 3. On Perusal Of The Aforesaid Reasons In The Condonation Application, We Are Of The View That There Is Sufficient Cause For Belated Filing Of This Appeal & No Latches Can Be Attributed To The Assessee. Hence, We Condone The Delay In Filing This Appeal & Proceed To Dispose Off The Appeal On Merits.

For Appellant: Mr. N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 250

completed on best judgement basis, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter before the AO. The AO is directed to afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly

Subramanian, Arni vs. ITO, Ward-2, Tiruvannamalai

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

ITA 3106/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3106/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Subramanian, Income Tax Officer No.1306/3 Rathinamangalam Road, Ward-2 Eb Nagar, Arni, Tiruvannamalai Tamil Nadu-632 301. [Pan: Atdps0357C] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT
Section 250

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. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of Ld.AO for readjudication ... 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

Murali, Mayiladuthurai vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kumbakonam

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

ITA 3073/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3073/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Murali, Income Tax Officer No.4/2, Villalar Kovil Sannathi Street, Ward-2 Mayiladuthurai. Kumbakonam. Tamil Nadu 609 001. [Pan: Bgtpm2496L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT
Section 250Section 69

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. It was accordingly Page - 2 - of 5 ITA No.3073 /Chny/2024 :- 3 -: pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back ... 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

Thippanayekar Nagamalai, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-2, Namakkal

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

ITA 3067/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3067/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2010-11 Thippanayekar Nagamalai, The Income Tax Officer No.44, Pullapanaikanoor, Ward-2, Chellappampatti, Namakkal. Namakkal Tamil Nadu-637 019. [Pan: Amwpn7181M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT
Section 250

that the Ld.First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the Page - 2 - of 5 addition by passing an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of Ld.AO for readjudication ... 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

St. Antonys Convent, Thalavadi vs. ACIT, Exemption Ward, Coimbatore

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

ITA 3066/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3065/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3066/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2015-16 St. Antonys Convent, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Thalavadi, Exemptions Ward, Tamil Nadu-689 572. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aakts4830N] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT
Section 250

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. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of Ld.AO for readjudication ... 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 by the Ld. Page

St. Antonys Convent, Thalavadi vs. ACIT, Exemptions, Coimbatore

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

ITA 3065/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3065/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3066/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2015-16 St. Antonys Convent, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Thalavadi, Exemptions Ward, Tamil Nadu-689 572. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aakts4830N] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT
Section 250

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. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of Ld.AO for readjudication ... 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 by the Ld. Page