← 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

Arth Foundation, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward Exemption 1(1), Delhi

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

ITA 966/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekarth Foundation, Vs. Ito, Ward Exemption 1 (1), 1202 – B, D Mall, Delhi. Netaji Subhash Place, Delhi – 110 034. (Pan : Aaeta9967A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Mansi Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.09.2024 Date Of Order : 26.11.2024 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income- Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To 'Ld. Cit(A)] Dated 01.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Is Registered Under Section 12A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2018–19 On 29.10.2018, Declaring A Deficit Of Rs.1,09,38,775/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny For Verification Of Gross Receipts. Accordingly, Notices Under Section 143 (2) & 142 (1) Of The Act

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 143

fixed assets on the basis of utilisation/period cost. We direct the Assessing Officer to verify the same as per law after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We direct the assessee also to submit the relevant information before the AO. In the result, the appeal filed

Guljeet Kaur Johal, Chandigarh vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 379/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 379/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Guljeet Kaur Johal, Vs. Pcit-1, बनाम H.No. 107, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh Chandigarh 160019 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aklpj8345G अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent (Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2024 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

such evidence in hand. 1.5. The Worthy Pr. CIT has conducted the impugned proceedings u/s 263 in extreme haste and without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before ... liberty to adduce the facts as deemed relevant before the JAO in consequence to this order. The JAO shall allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and to make relevant submissions, and reverify the submissions already made. It may be ensured that any fresh assessment order is passed within