← 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

Baraka Newland Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-2, Coimbatore

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

ITA 3010/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3010/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Baraka Newland Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of No.206, Spring Field Park, Vs. Income Tax, No.49, Subramanier Koil Street, Corporate Circle-2, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore. Coimbatore Tamil Nadu-641045 [Pan: Aaecb8391A] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri G.Tarun, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Eswaran, Jcit : 21.01.2025 सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069148705(1) Dated 26.09.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2017-18. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 250 Dated 26.09.2024 Passed By Nfac, Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri G.Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Eswaran, JCIT
Section 250

Accordingly the issues raised in this appeal is restored to the files of the Ld. AO for assessment de novo after giving necessary opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly

Karthikeyan, Thanjavur vs. ITO, Ward-, Thanjavur

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

ITA 3009/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3009/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Karthikeyan, Income Tax Officer, No.1175, Mela Street, Vs. Ward-1, Sadaiyarkoil, Thanjavur. Thanjavur, Sadayarkoil B.O. Tamil Nadu-614 019. [Pan: Anupk0210B] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Kathir, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Eswaran, Jcit सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 : 24.01.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1057309596(1) Dated 25.10.2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2013-14. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 250 Dated 25.10.2023 Passed By Nfac, Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Eswaran, JCIT
Section 144Section 250

Accordingly the issues raised in this appeal is restored to the files of the Ld. AO for assessment de novo after giving necessary opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly

Vellaisamy Duraipandy, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-2(1), Madurai

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

ITA 3005/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3005/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vellaisamy Duraipandy, Income Tax Officer, No.70, Officers Town, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward-2(1), Meenambalpuram, Madurai Madurai-625002. [Pan: Aebpd0632E] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri T.Vasudevan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Eswaran, Jcit सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 : 24.01.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064942814(1) Dated 16.05.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2018-19. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 250 Dated 16.05.2024 Passed By Nfac, Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri T.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Eswaran, JCIT
Section 144Section 250

Accordingly the issues raised in this appeal is restored to the files of the Ld. AO for assessment de novo after giving necessary opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly

Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Kanchipuram vs. ITO Non Corp Ward 22(6), Tambaram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2863/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2860, 2861, 2862 & 2863/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 50A, 8Th Street, Non Corp Ward 22(6) Vembuliamman Koil Street, Tambaram. Selaiyur, Kanchipuram 600 073. Chennai. [Pan: Aacpa 1677R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri () These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac) Delhi [Cit(A)] Even Date 28.10.2024 For Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Senior Citizen & Retired Govt. Employee Who Is Earning Mere Pension Income & Small Salary Income. The Assessee Is Incapable Of Understanding & Using The Income Tax Portal To Submit

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, IRS, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

shall not be violated. he is not a judge in the proper sense of the word; but he must give the parties an opportunity of being heard before him and stating their case and their view. he must give notice when he will proceed with the matter and he must

Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Kanchipuram vs. ITO Non Corp Ward 22(6), Tambaram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2862/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2860, 2861, 2862 & 2863/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 50A, 8Th Street, Non Corp Ward 22(6) Vembuliamman Koil Street, Tambaram. Selaiyur, Kanchipuram 600 073. Chennai. [Pan: Aacpa 1677R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri () These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac) Delhi [Cit(A)] Even Date 28.10.2024 For Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Senior Citizen & Retired Govt. Employee Who Is Earning Mere Pension Income & Small Salary Income. The Assessee Is Incapable Of Understanding & Using The Income Tax Portal To Submit

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, IRS, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

shall not be violated. he is not a judge in the proper sense of the word; but he must give the parties an opportunity of being heard before him and stating their case and their view. he must give notice when he will proceed with the matter and he must

Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Kanchipuram vs. ITO Non Corp Ward 22(6), Tambaram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2861/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2860, 2861, 2862 & 2863/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 50A, 8Th Street, Non Corp Ward 22(6) Vembuliamman Koil Street, Tambaram. Selaiyur, Kanchipuram 600 073. Chennai. [Pan: Aacpa 1677R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri () These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac) Delhi [Cit(A)] Even Date 28.10.2024 For Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Senior Citizen & Retired Govt. Employee Who Is Earning Mere Pension Income & Small Salary Income. The Assessee Is Incapable Of Understanding & Using The Income Tax Portal To Submit

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, IRS, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

shall not be violated. he is not a judge in the proper sense of the word; but he must give the parties an opportunity of being heard before him and stating their case and their view. he must give notice when he will proceed with the matter and he must

Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Kanchipuram vs. ITO Non Corp Ward 22(6), Tambaram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2860/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2860, 2861, 2862 & 2863/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) Shanmugam Arivazhagan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 50A, 8Th Street, Non Corp Ward 22(6) Vembuliamman Koil Street, Tambaram. Selaiyur, Kanchipuram 600 073. Chennai. [Pan: Aacpa 1677R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri () These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac) Delhi [Cit(A)] Even Date 28.10.2024 For Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Senior Citizen & Retired Govt. Employee Who Is Earning Mere Pension Income & Small Salary Income. The Assessee Is Incapable Of Understanding & Using The Income Tax Portal To Submit

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pushpa Hemachand, IRS, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

shall not be violated. he is not a judge in the proper sense of the word; but he must give the parties an opportunity of being heard before him and stating their case and their view. he must give notice when he will proceed with the matter and he must

Atul Finlease, Jamnagar vs. DCIT Circle 2(1), Jamnagar

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

ITA 875/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.875/Rjt/ 2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Atul Finlease. Vs. The Dcit Circle-2(1), C/O Atul Automotives, Rajkot Jamnagar Jamnagar Highway, Hapa. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatfa3518L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kapil Sanghavi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing :21/01/2025 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement :23/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghavi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 2(40)Section 69A

documents. 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, we restore the matter back ... file of Ld. AO 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 his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order