← 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

Sri Gouri Jarathi, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Warangal

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

ITA 473/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.473/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Gouri Jarathi Vs. Income Tax Officer Warangal Ward 3 Pan:Bcypj5294C Warangal (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 30/05/2024 आदेश/Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.03.2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Sole Ground Raised By The Assessee Is On The Appellate Order Passed By The Learned Cit (A) Nfac, In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.38,00,500/- As Unexplained Money U/S 69A Of The Act Without Giving An Opportunity Of Being Heard.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 271ASection 69A

learned CIT (A) NFAC, in sustaining the addition of Rs.38,00,500/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act without giving an opportunity of being heard. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed her return of income ... from the date of this order. The Learned CIT (A) NFAC shall decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result

ACIT, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai vs. M/S Standard Chargered Global Business Servies Pvt. Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 124/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 964/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Standard Chartered Global The Deputy Commissioner Business Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Of Income Tax, No.1, Haddows Road, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai. Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aaecs 9043E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 124/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 The Assistant Standard Chartered Global Commissioner Of Income Vs. Business Services Pvt. Tax, Ltd., Corporate Circle 3(1), No.1, Haddows Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aaecs 9043E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 195Section 40

adjudicated at all. Hence, we remit this issue to the file of the AO, who will decide this issue denovo after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, as directed above. Revenue’s Appeal

Standard Chartered Global Business Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 964/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 964/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Standard Chartered Global The Deputy Commissioner Business Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Of Income Tax, No.1, Haddows Road, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai. Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aaecs 9043E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 124/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 The Assistant Standard Chartered Global Commissioner Of Income Vs. Business Services Pvt. Tax, Ltd., Corporate Circle 3(1), No.1, Haddows Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aaecs 9043E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 195Section 40

adjudicated at all. Hence, we remit this issue to the file of the AO, who will decide this issue denovo after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, as directed above. Revenue’s Appeal

Tyro India, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 665/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2017-18 Tyro India Ito Ward 31(3)(2) Now 5, New Ambica Apartment, Transferred To 41(4)(4) Jawahar Nagar Road, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Goregaon (West), Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai- 400062. Bandra (East), Pan: Aacft6482D Mumbai- 400051. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P.D. Chougule (Addl. Cit), Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 22 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per: Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Appellant Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit Appeal Vide Its Order No. Itba/Nfac/ S/250/2023-24/1058988518(1) Dated 22/12/2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 1. The Following Grounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised:- “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessing Officer Erred In Enhancing Scope Of Scrutiny Wrongly Converting The Cass Based

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule (Addl. CIT), Sr. D.R
Section 234ASection 270ASection 274

aside and be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT Appeal for adjudicating the issue afresh by providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The appellant is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT, Appeal and produce all relevant documents/material before him to substantiate its claim