← 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

Srinivasan Narayanan, Hosur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1009/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT-DR

Ld.CIT(A) shall consider the affidavit filed by the assessee and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. On merits of the case, we note that nothing has been decided by the Ld.CIT(A) to consider ... 1012/Bang/2024 directed to furnish all necessary evidences / documents in support of its claim. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by assessee in all the appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, all the appeals filed

Srinivasan Narayanan, Hosur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1008/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, CIT-DR

Ld.CIT(A) shall consider the affidavit filed by the assessee and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. On merits of the case, we note that nothing has been decided by the Ld.CIT(A) to consider ... 1012/Bang/2024 directed to furnish all necessary evidences / documents in support of its claim. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by assessee in all the appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, all the appeals filed

Colgate-Palmolive (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax -6, Mumbai

ITA 2645/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 2645/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry & Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RsFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT, D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80GSection 80J

quashed/set aside for fresh adjudication after considering the facts as discussed above. 4. In this connection, you are hereby given an opportunity of being heard and your case is fixed for hearing/making submission online on or before 08.02.2024 at 03.00 PM. In case of non-compliance, it will be presumed

Mahaveer Chand, Thane vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Mumbai

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes while all the other grounds (i

ITA 2495/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 115BSection 144Section 153ASection 263Section 28Section 68

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Pr. CIT erred in passing the revision order u/s.263 without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant, thereby seriously violated the principle of natural justice; 2. On facts and circumstances of the case ... passed on 20/06/2024. We note that Section 263 of the Act mandates that before passing order under Section 263 of the Act, opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee. It is the case of the Appellant that the effective opportunity of being heard was not granted

Mahaveer Chand, Thane vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Mumbai

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes while all the other grounds (i

ITA 2494/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 115BSection 144Section 153ASection 263Section 28Section 68

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Pr. CIT erred in passing the revision order u/s.263 without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant, thereby seriously violated the principle of natural justice; 2. On facts and circumstances of the case ... passed on 20/06/2024. We note that Section 263 of the Act mandates that before passing order under Section 263 of the Act, opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee. It is the case of the Appellant that the effective opportunity of being heard was not granted

Mahaveer Chand, Thane vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Mumbai

The appeals is allowed for statistical purposes while all the other grounds (i

ITA 2493/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 115BSection 144Section 153ASection 263Section 28Section 68

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Pr. CIT erred in passing the revision order u/s.263 without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant, thereby seriously violated the principle of natural justice; 2. On facts and circumstances of the case ... passed on 20/06/2024. We note that Section 263 of the Act mandates that before passing order under Section 263 of the Act, opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee. It is the case of the Appellant that the effective opportunity of being heard was not granted

The Vasai Blind Relief Association, Vasai vs. ITO Exemption, Thane

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

ITA 2375/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. D/R
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 250

issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to decide the appeal afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 29th

Impresario Entertainment & Hospitality Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, India vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax PCIT, Mumbai-5, Ayakar Bhavan Mumbai

ITA 1926/MUM/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ, मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON

Mr. Naresh Topandas Aidasani, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi/ DCIT-27(2), Vashi, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the above terms

ITA 105/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)

learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the Appellant's application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal without affording the Appellant any opportunity of being heard at all and without appreciating in right perspective the detailed application for condonation of delay and the affidavit filed by the Appellant

Mala Ashok Khaitan, Mumbai vs. Ward 23(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 4426/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anil TopiwalaFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

issue in remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication as per law and shall grant the Appellant reasonable opportunity of being heard. We note that the Assessing Officer had rejected the bills or invoices pertaining to renovation cost furnished by the Appellant as being non-genuine

M/S Guruji Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director Income Tax. CPC Circle-1, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4283/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Guruji Infrastructure Adit, Cpc, Bangalore Private Limited 560500

For Appellant: Ms. Shruti KalyanikarFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

case and in law, the order is bad in law as: i. The same is passed without granting proper, sufficient and adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant; ii. The order is passed without application of mind to the facts and the submissions brought on record. 2. NO ADJUSTMENT

Lata Sriram, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 4015/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawallata Sriram Vs. Ito 16(2)(4), Aayakar Bhavan, 12/N, Dilwara, M.K.Road, M.K.Road, Mumbai -400020. Mumbai – 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aaups1197G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 144

Assessing Officer has only considered and estimated profit on the basis of few documents available to him without giving proper opportunity of being heard. Further, there were carried 2 Lata Sriram, Mumbai forward losses of preceding previous years which Assessing Officer failed to consider while completing the assessment. 2. Your ... that the Assessing Officer is not justified in disallowing cash deposit, professional fees, interest income and unexplained credit card expenses without giving proper opportunity of being heard. 3. Your appellant prays that the additions made by Assessing Officer be dropped. 4. Your appellant craves to leave, to add, to alter

K & S Fincon Pvt. Ltd., U.P vs. ITO, Ward-14(1), Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 550/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 68

aside and the matter may be restored to the file of learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. The learned DR opposed the submissions and submitted that assessee has been thoroughly negligent in pursuing its case ... order of learned CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of learned First Appellate Authority for fresh decision after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 6 6. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced

Pp Jewellers Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-25, Delhi

ITA 2449/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumarpp Jewellers Private Ltd., Vs. Acit, Cc – 25, H-05, Pp Tower, Delhi. Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, Delhi – 110 034. (Pan : Aaacp0874G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ss Nagar, Advocate Shri Gaurav Sachdeva, Ca Revenue By : Shri Brij Mohan Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2024 Date Of Order : 29.07.2024 Order Per Shamim Yahyathis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)- 29, New Delhi Dated 19.03.2024 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Disallowance, Imposition Of Tax & Interest With Reference Thereto, The Quantification Of Taxable Income & The Tax Liability, Has Been Grossly Unjustified, Erroneous & Unsustainable & Necessary Direction Be Given To The Ao To Give Appropriate Relief In Accordance With Law. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit- (A) Was Not Justified & Grossly Erred In Dismissing The Appeal On Account

For Appellant: Shri SS Nagar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Brij Mohan Singh, Sr. DR
Section 2(22)(c)

would be served if the matter is remitted to the file of ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) is directed to grant an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the matter as per law. Order pronounced in the open court on this 29TH day of July

Sandeep, Greater Noida vs. ITO Ward 5(2)(3), Noida

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

ITA 2029/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyasandeep, Vs. Ito, Ward 5(2)(3), House No.197, Sunapura, Noida. Sohan Pura, Dhoon, Manikpur, Greater Noida – 201 306 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Cnzps3156F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Pallavi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2024 Date Of Order : 29.07.2024 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 28.02.2024 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Erred In Law By Passing An Ex-Parte Order (Impugned Order) Without Discussing The Merits Of The Case & Dismissing The Appeal For Non-Appearance Making The Impugned Order Non-Est. 2. That In Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred Both In Law & On Facts In Passing The Impugned Assessment Order U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) R/W Section L44B Of The Act Dated 02.03.2023 Which Is Erroneous & Not In Accordance With Law, Hence The Same Is Liable To Be Annulled.

For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 69Section 69A

issue to the file of ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) is directed to pass an order afresh after giving the assessee proper opportunity of being heard. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 29TH

Kaushlya Chaudhary, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Gurugram

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1538/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 270A

aside and restored back to the file of the CIT(A) to decide it afresh as above after affording the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant/assessee. 3 5. In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court

Kaushlya Chaudhary, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Gurgaon, Gurugram

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1395/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234ASection 234BSection 28Section 56Section 57

learned CIT(Appeals) and restore the matter to the file of learned CIT(A) for decision afresh on merits after affording adequate opportunity of being heard. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 29.07.2024. (AVDHESH

Ultimate International Private Limited, Delhi vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangaluru, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2780/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law, Hon'ble NFAC has passed the order without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. 2 Ultimate International Pvt. Ltd. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT Central Circle-2, Noida vs. Alok Vatsa, Noida

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 1717/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 132ASection 2(14)

Though, learned Departmental Representative has submitted before us that learned Commissioner (Appeals) should not have deleted the addition entertaining fresh evidence without providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessing Officer, however, we are not impressed due to following reasons -firstly, the powers of learned First Appellate Authority

Exotic Realtors and Developers, Chandigarh vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 189/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263

before the assessing officer at the time of 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