← 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

Mohammad Ali Jafar, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward-4(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 506/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised

Rupesh Mohit Shah, Nagpur vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Nagpur

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

ITA 499/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Ahay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised

Shri Gorakshan Sanstha, Yavatmal vs. CIT Exemptions Pune, Pune

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

ITA 493/NAG/2024[AY 2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised

P Ghode Petroleum, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 461/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

learned CIT(A) and restore the entire matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The 3 P. Ghode Petroleum ITA no.461/Nag./2024 assessee is also directed to be prompt in adhering to the statutory notices

Indounique Flame Limited, Nagpur vs. DCIT Circle-1, Nagpur

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

ITA 361/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Himesh DemleFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 250Section 50C

facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per the prevailing law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have provided an opportunity of being heard before framing the order u/s 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2 Indounique Flame Ltd. ITA no.361/Nag./2024 3. That, on the facts ... learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised

Sant Tukdoji Nagri Shahkari Pat Sanstha Limited, Hinganghat vs. ITO Ward - 2, Wardha

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 355/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate these appeal afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised

Sant Tukdoji Nagri Shahkari Pat Sanstha Limited Hinganghat, Hinganghat vs. ITO Ward - 2, Wardha

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 354/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate these appeal afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised

Sarvodaya Nagri Co Op Pat Soc Ltd, Shegaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Khamgaon

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

ITA 330/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 144Section 234ASection 69ASection 80P

appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. The order passed by CIT(A) is without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard and is in violation of principles of natural justice. Dismissal of grounds is unjustified and unwarranted. 2. The order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless ... learned CIT(A) for denovo adjudication in line with our observations supra. The learned CIT(A) is directed to grant sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to adduce all the evidences which are connected to the issue so raised. 7. In the result

Shree Sadguru Gajanan Maharaj Sewabhavi Mandal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward-1, Exemption, Nagpur

In the result, appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 304/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao

For Appellant: Shri Naman ChhajedFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

file of the Assessing Officer and direct him to adjudicate the matters afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, assessee

Sachin Khare, Nagpur vs. DCIT ACIT, Circle 1, Nagpur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the condition as stated in Para–8 above

ITA 281/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 271ASection 68

adjudicate these appeals afresh on merit and in accordance with law. Before passing speaking orders, the learned CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly

Sachin Khare, Nagpur vs. DCIT ACIT, Circle 1, Nagpur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the condition as stated in Para–8 above

ITA 280/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 271ASection 68

adjudicate these appeals afresh on merit and in accordance with law. Before passing speaking orders, the learned CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly

Gospel India Ministeries, Chandrapur vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 267/NAG/2024[00-00]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sapan UsretheFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

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 ... assessee through e-portal and email. However, the assessee neither submitted explanation to the show cause notice till date nor availed the opportunity of being heard. 4. The assessee responded to the said notice and furnished the compliance on 24/07/2024. The assessee has furnished so many bills wherein most

Joyshish Amarendranath Maitra, Akola vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle Akola, Akola

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

ITA 140/NAG/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 68

passed by the learned CIT(A) and remit back the entire matter to his file for denovo adjudication on merits after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly

The Buldana Zillakrishi Udogik Sahakari Sanstha Ltd, Malkapur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Khamgaon

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

ITA 408/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

hearing, the learned A.R. appearing for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He also stated that certain documents could not be filed before the learned CIT(A) and thus prayed that one opportunity ... learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised

M.P. Veerachandra Chettiyar, Kadavanthara vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Range-1, Non Corporate Ward-1(50, Kochi

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

ITA 557/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Respondent: Smt. Divya Ravindran
Section 56(2)(vii)

restore the appeal to the file of Ld.CIT(A) with the direction to dispose the appeal on merits after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court

Manish Kumar Jaisinghani, Prabhat Plaza vs. Income Tax Officer 1(1) Indore, Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 126/IND/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

Appeals) erred in passing ex-parte order without affording sufficient Page 1 of 6 Manish Kumar Jaisinghani ITA No. 126/Ind/2024 - AY 2015-16 opportunity of being heard; which is against the law of natural justice and deserves to be quashed. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances

Arti Surana, Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward - 47(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1405/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jan 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1405/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Arti Surana………………………………..……………………….....Appellant Flat 5Cd, Block Iv, 5Th Floor, Vivek Vihar, Phase V, 493/C/A, G. T Road (South), Howrah-711101. [Pan: Akcpp7261L] Vs. Ito, Ward-47(1), Kolkata……….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rajkumar Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashutosh Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 27, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.04.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Her Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,23,590/-. The Assessing Officer Found The Assessee Has Showed Income Under The Heads Of Short-Term Capital Gain & Other Sources. The Assessee Claimed Exemption Under The Head Of Short-Term Capital Gain From Transaction On Which Securities Transaction Tax Is Paid. However, During The Assessment Proceedings, The Department Received Information Which Indicated That The Assessee Had Traded In Shares Of Amm Ltd. & Eml Scrip Code (538653) To The

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

back the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to re-examine the case on merits after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to represent her case. We also direct the assessee to diligently comply I.T.A. No.1405/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Arti Surana

Kushal Bharat Realcon Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(3), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1099/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1099/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kushal Bharat Realcon Pvt. Ltd………………………….....Appellant 16, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata – 700013. [Pan: Aahcm3213B] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Kolkata……….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddhharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashutosh Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 27, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 192 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause & The Delay Was Not Intentional. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.17,15,430/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 250(6)

back the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to re-examine the case on merits after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to represent its case. We also direct the assessee to diligently comply with the notices issued and duly participate

M/S. Hind Mercantile Corporation P. Ltd., Namakkal vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), Chennai

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

ITA 1967/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1967/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 56(2)(ix)

assessee. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of being heard to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter

Kailash Baburao Suryawanshi, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2359/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Assessee in PersonFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)

filed a complaint with Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station vis-à-vis fraud committed by his employees. At last the assessee prayed that an opportunity of being heard by provided before the AO so that the assessee can prove his case and bonafides. 8. The ld. DR relied on the orders