← 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

Anilkumar Hargovinbhai Patel, Kalol vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana

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

ITA 178/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumarshri Tr Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nishit B Jesur, ARsFor Respondent: Shri AP Singh, CIT. DR
Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69

ought not to have dismissed the appeal filed before him. The appellant must be granted an opportunity of being heard. It is therefore prayed that the addition made by Ld. AO and appeal not admitted by the CIT(A) may please be deleted in the interest of natural justice

Niket Ravibhai Patel, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1215/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarnad Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 50C

raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in not granting proper opportunity of being heard and passing the order without considering the submission of the appellant. The order so passed is prayed to be quashed and set aside

ACIT, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. Vamsi Mohan Vallabhaneni, Vijayawada

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

ITA 324/HYD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Sri Vamsi Mohan Vallabhaneni, Tax, R/O.Vijayawada. Central Circle – 3(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Adrpv4231C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. M. Narmadha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.12.2024 10.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmadha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

that the Assessing Officer shall not direct the assessee to get the accounts so audited unless the assessee has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (2B) The provisions of sub-section (2A) shall have effect notwithstanding that the accounts of the assessee have been audited under any other ... shall be paid by the Central Government. (3) The assessee shall, except where the assessment is made under section 144, be given an opportunity of being heard in respect of any material gathered on the basis of any inquiry under sub-section (2) or any audit under sub-section

Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex, Kakinada vs. Principalmcommissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 234/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.234/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex V. Pr.Cit Aayakar Bhavan 1-2015/A, Uppalanka Dabagardens – 530020 Kakinada – 533016, Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Abdfs4641P]

Section 143(3)Section 194Section 263

Tribunal, the Tribunal vide its order dated 29.11.2023 partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by directing the Ld.Pr.CIT to give one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee with respect to the applicability of TDS provisions on expenditure towards interest, commission, contract and professional charges. Ld.Pr.CIT

Ratnakar Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 850/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 850/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Ratnakar Merchandise Pvt. Limited,…………Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan:Aadcr8555M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 20, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Limited which the ld. Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass an appropriate order basing on the material available on record after opportunity of being heard to the asessee. Hence, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Sharma Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Malda vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Malda

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

ITA 1944/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 1944/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Sharma Real Estate Private Limited,…………Appellant 43, N.S. Road, English Bazar, Malda-732101, West Bengal [Pan:Aakcs8979F] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,...Respondent Circle-3(1), Malda, Income Tax Office, Netaji Market Complex, 1St Floor, Rathbari, Malda-732101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Ashim Prakash, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Arun Kanti Dutta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 19, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(2)

passed an ex-parte order. Therefore, he prayed to remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for one more opportunity of being heard to substantiate its claim. 7. We have perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

Bansal Foundation, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(2), Exemption, Kolkata

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

ITA 107/KOL/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 107/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Bansal Foundation,………………………………Appellant 119, Park Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700016 [Pan:Aadtb0630J] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-1(2), Exemption, Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Ms. Puja Somani, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 13, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

made by the ld. Assessing Officer. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and pleaded for one more opportunity of being heard before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. It was the submission of the ld. D.R. that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has granted sufficient opportunities ... 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

Chamimoothan Masilamani, Palakkad vs. ITO Ward-1 & (Tps), Palakkad

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

ITA 627/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 250(6)

circumstances, we restore this matter to the CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh. Needless to say, the CIT(A) will afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. And the stay application

Karikkakom Sree Chamundi Temple Trust, Trivandrum vs. The CIT Exemptions, Kochi

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

ITA 446/COCH/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Dec 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Alan Dev, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 12A

No.443/Coch/2023. Karikkakom Sree Chamundi Temple Trust. amended trust deed. Needless to say that the CIT(E) will afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. Before parting we must clarify that when we have heard the matter we have taken a view that the appeal of the assessee

Sunitha, Coimbatore vs. PCIT -1, Coim, Batore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2013/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2013/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-2019) Sunitha, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No.30, Sivaji Colony, Income Tax -1, Thadagam Road, Coimbatore Edayarpalayam, Coimbatore 641 025. [Pan: Bhqps 4789G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, IRS, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 69

Assessing Officer (FAO) to re-do the assessment denovo under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’) after adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee?’’. 4. The ld. Ld. Assessing Officer framed reassessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide order dated 20.04.2021 as under ... erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, he may, after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such inquiry as he deems necessary, pass such order thereon as the circumstances of the case justify

Gauranga Papers LLP, Andheri (West), Mumbai vs. Income-Tax Officer 24(1)(1), Lalbaug, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5302/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

assessment order. In view of the above, the assessing officer is directed to rectify the above mistake after giving the appellant an opportunity of being heard in the matter. Accordingly, the ground No 2 is dismissed. 7. Before us ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the course

Corcon Institute of Corrosion, Sewri, Mumbai vs. Anil Babu, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 503/MUM/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2016-17 Corcon Institute Of Anil Babu Corrosion Income Tax Office, 8 T.K. Industrial Estate, Exem. Ward 1(2) Vs. Sewri, Mumbai. Mumbai- 400015. Pan: Aafcc5627H Appellant : Respondent

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Pradnya Gholap (Sr. DR)
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

circulars issued and the view adopted by the competent authority in respect of pending condonation petition. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. Corcon Institute of Corrosion.; A. Y. 2016-17 Accordingly the grounds raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

DCIT-13(1)(2), Mumbai, Income Tax Dept. Mumbai vs. Qyuki Digital Media Pvt. Ltd., Bandra

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3758/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2012-13 Dcit-13(1)(2), Qyuki Digital Media Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 218, 7/8, Hari Niwas Building, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 30Th Cross Road, Mumbai. Off S.V. Road, Bandra (W) Mumbai. Pan : Aaocs4185R (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Prateek Jha & Shri Prayag Jha, For Revenue : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-12-2024

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha &For Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 68

file of the AO for the limited purpose of examining the financial statements filed by CSI BD Mauritius. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the AO may take appropriate decision in accordance with law. 7. The next issue contested by the Revenue relates to disallowance

Hitesh Navinchandra Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 42(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 2280/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Pradnya Gholap (Sr. DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 24Section 80CSection 80D

Ld.AO to consider the claim based on the evidences filed by the assessee in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. Accordingly Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Ground

Satish Chandra, Solan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 46/DEL/2024[ay 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia&

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 43BSection 54

That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law & Legal facts of the case in passing the ex-parte order without according proper opportunity of being heard which is highly unjustified, uncalled for and needs to be quashed. 3. That the Ed. CIT(A) has erred in law & facts ... quashed. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law & facts of the case in passing the ex-parte order without according proper opportunity of being heard which is highly unjustified, uncalled for and needs to be quashed. 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law & facts

Satish Chandra, Solan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3, Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 45/DEL/2024[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia&

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 43BSection 54

That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law & Legal facts of the case in passing the ex-parte order without according proper opportunity of being heard which is highly unjustified, uncalled for and needs to be quashed. 3. That the Ed. CIT(A) has erred in law & facts ... quashed. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law & facts of the case in passing the ex-parte order without according proper opportunity of being heard which is highly unjustified, uncalled for and needs to be quashed. 3. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law & facts

Liberal Advisory Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-15(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3655/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshliberal Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, 205, 2Nd Floor, V-4, Mayur Plaza-2, Circle-15(2), Local Shopping Centre, Mayur Vihar New Delhi Phase-I, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcl1284B

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds

Knoldus Software LLP, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-49(1), Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1847/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usa.Yr. : 2019-20 Knoldus Software Llp, Vs. Acit, Circle 49(1), 10/19, West Patel Nagar, Delhi New Delhi – 110 008 (Pan: Aamfk0433H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37(7)

direct the AO to verify the veracity of the claim of the assessee and thereafter pass a speaking order, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. 5. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

Neelkanth Contractors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 18(2), Delhi

Appeal is disposed of by remitting the issue to the file of the Ld

ITA 177/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Smt. Renu Jauhrineelkanth Contractors Vs. Income Tax Officer, Private Limited Ward-18(2) 9/1934, Gali No.2, Cr Building Ito Kailash Nagar New Delhi New Delhi – 110031 110001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccn2808C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Karnav Mahrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

circumstances of the matter, we in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice find it fit and proper to grant a further opportunity of being heard to the assessee by the Ld. CIT(A) and, thus, the present appeal is disposed of by remitting the issue to the file ... adjudication of the same afresh. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass a reasoned order upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing

Jagjit Singh Kataria, Sonepat vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1245/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US (Judicial Member)

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

setting aside the same under Section 263 of the Act, directed Assessing Officer to pass a fresh assessment order after giving due opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 2 Jagjit Singh Kataria Vs. Pr. CIT 2. The brief facts of the case are that the case was selected