“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

Maharashtra Small Scale Industries Development Corporation Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1803/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Juducial Member

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. DR

appellate order so passed is bad and illegal as the Ld. CIT (A) erred in - (i) Not granting proper, sufficient and adequate opportunity of being heard; and (ii) Not providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the Appellant. 2.3 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances

Late Shri Jetha Verva Chavada Represented Through Legal Heir Mrs. Dayaki Jetha Chavada, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-28(1)(1), Navi Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1748/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V.D. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Dhivya Ruth J., Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 2(29)Section 250Section 69A

facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte without giving adequate opportunity of being heard to appellant. 4. Without prejudice to other grounds of appeal, on facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT(A) erred in dismissing

Farees Ahmed Khalil Ahmed, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-23(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1682/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr. K GopalFor Respondent: Mr. Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 69

parte order dated parte order dated 21.08.2023 witho without providing the Appellant a reasonable opportunity of ut providing the Appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Thus, the impugned order passed is in gross violation of the being heard. Thus, the impugned order passed is in gross violation

Shani Corporation Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 879/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: The Appellate Authority & Submitted That Ld. Cit(A) Has Sent The Messages/Notices To Unrelated Email. In This Regard, He Submitted

direction to issue the notice to the assessee and adjudicate the issues raised by the assessee as per law after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He may issue the notice in the proper email id and it is directed to the assessee also to communicate

Kritika Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 36(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 172/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Shaantanu Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rishpal Bedi, CIT-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 250

application under Rule 46 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 dated 28.12.2023. The Learned CIT(A) is further directed to grant and opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Khaitan Chemicals and Fertilizers Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(2), C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1179/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234Section 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. On the other hand, learned DR relied on the orders of authorities below. 5 5. We have heard rival submissions ... order of learned CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of learned First Appellate Authority for decision afresh after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open

Sangay Choden Bhutia, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 70(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 624/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHΜΑΝ (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 37(1)

after which new demand of Rs.210780/- created in vengeance without application of legal mind for which the appellant was not provided any opportunity of being heard and thus the principal of natural justice violated.” 7. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that

Veer Industries, G.T Road vs. Income Tax Officer 62(1), Civic Centre

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

ITA 3827/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Veer Industries Vs. Ito 421-F, Plot No.48, Gali No.8, 62(1), Civic Centre Friends Colony, Gt Road, Shahdara, Delhi-110095 Pan No.Aaifv7231Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Adjournment Application Respondent By Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24/07/2024 Order Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm:

Section 142Section 144BSection 147

play we restore the issues to the files of the Ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh after affording a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 7. The order pronounced

Taru Saxena, Uttar Pradesh vs. ITO Ward-53(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 3100/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Taru Saxena Vs. Ito G-1310, Vvip Rajnagar Ward—53 (5) Extension Ghaziabad New Delhi 201017 Pan No. Cvbps7515N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24/07/2024 Order Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Nfac”] Vide Order Dated 01.09.2023 Pertaining To A.Y. 2016-17 & Arises Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2018 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 [Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’].

Section 143(3)

issues to the files of the AO. The AO is directed to decide the issues afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee is directed to attend the assessment proceedings and furnish all necessary details in support of his assessment. Thus

Varun Kaushik, Ghaziabad vs. ITO-W-2(2)(5), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 2894/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Adjournment ApplicationFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 250

erred on law and on facts in confirming the additions made by A.O. of Rs. 1,16,11,000/- without giving proper opportunity of being heard and to adduce evidence and therefore the additions have been made against the principles of natural justice as per law.” 4. The order

Azad Singh, Faridabad vs. ITO War 1-1, Faridabad

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

ITA 2196/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) & The Assessee Filed Detailed

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

fact of the case, because both of them failed to appreciate that the appellant was prevented by opportunity of Being heard before made addition under section 68 of the income tax act, 1961. 2. That the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) thereby upholding the additions ... therein that the appellant was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause to file the same before the Assessing Officer due to lack of opportunity of Being heard. 4. That the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) was further perverse to the law and to the facts

Arvind Pandey, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(2), Gurgaon

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

ITA 1982/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 269S

issue back to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee as per law after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, appeal filed

Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 496/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 496/Del/2022 (A.Y 2017-18) Benetton India Pvt. Ltd., Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Plot No. 25B, Block Infocity Vs. Tax, Circle : 4 (2), Sector : 34, Gurugram, New Delhi. Haryana.Pan:Aaacd1013F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, H. S. Ajmani, Sh. Ankul Goel & Ms. Rashi Khanna, Advs Department By: Shri Mahesh Shah, [Cit] D.R. & Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, H. S. Ajmani, ShFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)

erred in violating the provisions of section 144B of the Act and principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of being heard and failing to issue a show-cause notice for the proposed variation. Grounds pertaining to addition on account of payment of royalty ... Gurgaon assessee is remanded to the file of the TPO for fresh determination in accordance with law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, Ground 3 and sub-grounds are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 22. Ground No. 4 and its sub grounds pertaining reimbursement

R N Sahni, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward - 32(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the above directions

ITA 1521/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: CIT(A) & again considering the said amount as income from house property resulting into double additions.3. The Id. CIT(A) is wrong in confirming the disallowance of Rs.30985/- out of the total disallowance amounting to Rs.1893103/- u/s 43-B on account of unpaid taxes since the assessee has furnished all the bills/vouchers & copy of Tax Audit Report duly marked.

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43

file of AO to verify the relevant information submitted in the paper book and allow the same as per law after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 6. With regard to ground no.3 ... inclined to remit this issue to the file of AO to verify the same and allow as per law after giving proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 8. In the result, the appeal filed

ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Benetton India P.Ltd, Gurgaon

ITA 7389/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, H. S. Ajmani, ShFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)

Magna Vision Tradelinks and Consultancy LLP, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1)(1), Aayakar Bhawan, Vejalpur

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

ITA 484/AHD/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year : 2017-18 Magna Vision Tradelinks & Vs. Ito, Ward-6(1)(1) Consultancy Llp Ahmedabad. Shed No.9, Bhandari Estate Rakhial Gujarat. Pan : Aatfm 9570 C (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjaykumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjaykumar, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250

deleted. 4. Even before your appellant could file the submissions for which adjournment was taken and without allowing any further opportunity or the opportunity of being heard via Video Conferencing, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order dated 19-01-2024 sustaining the additions made without allowing the opportunity

Nalinkumar Ratilal Patel, Vadodara vs. Income Tax Officer, Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 621/AHD/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 69

under section 143(3) r.w.s.147 is bad in law and void-ab-initio, as the LAO has passed the order without giving any opportunity of being heard to the appellant and without considering the facts of the case. The LAO has passed the order on the basis of statement ... cost of land as per Sale Deed, however the LAO has made addition for the cost of land, without giving any opportunity of being heard, even though your appellant has made all the payment out of his bank account, and the copy of bank statement was duly submitted

Health Foundation & Research Centre, Dahod vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Exemption, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 516/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.516/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Health Foundation & The Acit बनाम/ Research Centre Circle-2 (Exemption) Gf Post Box No.156 Ahmedabad-380 015 V/S. Sheth Shri Girdharlal Marg Raliyati Road, Dahold – 389 151 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaath 0867 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) ….. "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 08/05/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 19/12/2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Health Foundation & Research Centre Vs. Acit Asst. Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR

Section 11Section 13(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts and in law in deciding appeal ex-parte without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard and in not adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merit. 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred on facts ... Representative (DR) supported our view. 4.4. Upon careful examination, we find merit in the assessee’s arguments regarding the lack of a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the Ld.CIT(A). The circumstances provided, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent unavailability of the chartered accountant

J vs. Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vadodaravs.the Pr. CIT, Vadodara-1, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 411/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43Section 49

passing the fresh assessment order, consequent to this order under section 263 of the Act, the Assessing Officer shall grant reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 5. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by PCIT. The counsel for the assessee

Ms Diamond Enterprises, Parbhani vs. ITO Hingoli, Parbhani

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 690/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 144Section 271ASection 271BSection 44A

NFAC with a direction to condone the delay in filing of the appeal and decide the issue on merit after giving one opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 11. The assessee in its sole ground has challenged ... NFAC with a direction to condone the delay in filing of the appeal and decide the appeal on merit after giving one opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 15. In the result