← 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

M/S. Pentamedia Graphics Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corporate Circle-20(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1138/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1138/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 Pentamedia Graphics Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.17/7, Thiyagaraya Street, Vs. Non-Corporate Circle – 20(1), T. Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aaacp 1647B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi In Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/ 1055115890(1) Dated 14.08.2023. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle- 20(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2014-15 U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 31.12.2016. 2. At The Outset, The Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Stated That The Cit(A) As Well As The Ao Has Not Allowed Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard & There Is Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice & For This, The Assessee Has Raised Ground Nos.1.1 To 1.3, Which Read As Under:- “1.1 The Cit(A) Went Wrong In Disposing Of The Appeal In A Summary Manner Without Adverting To The Facts Of The Case & The Submissions Made Before Him In The Proper Perspective.

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)

outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the CIT(A) as well as the AO has not allowed proper opportunity of being heard and there is violation of principles of natural justice and for this, the assessee has raised ground Nos.1.1 to 1.3, which read as under ... without making it available to the appellant for comments/rejoinder. 1.3 The CIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal without giving proper opportunity of being heard and thus the order is violative of the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the Income-Tax Act. 3. The ld.counsel

Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, Chandigarh vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 335/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 335/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, Vs. The Pcit-1, बनाम Cr Building, Sector 17, H. No. 1656, Sector 33-D, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bykps6091L 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

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

financial year in question. 1.6 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 applicant. 335-Chd-2024 – Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, Chandigarh , 3 2. That the appellant crave leave for any addition, deletion or amendment ... Assessing Officer at the time of the assessment proceedings in consequence to this order. The Assessing Officer shall allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and to make relevant submissions. It may be ensured that the fresh assessment order is passed within the prescribed time as stipulated under section