← 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

Radha Govind Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 753/AHD/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Mar 2024

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 752 & 753/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Na) Radha Govind Charitable Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Trust Tax (Exemption), Vs. Plot No.3, Sankalp House, Ahmedabad Nr. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaetr2408R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 25/01/2024 Hearing 25/01/2024 (Signed By The Jm On घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 20/03/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Two Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 08.08.2023 & 01.08.2023 Passed By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) (Cit(E)), Ahmedabad, Whereby & Whereunder The Applications For Approval Under Section 80G(5)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) & The Application For Registration Under Section 12A(1)(Ac)(Ii) Of The Act Respectively Were Rejected.

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT. DR
Section 1Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(ii)Section 80G(5)(iii)

facts and circumstances of both cases, we are of the opinion that the assessee is required to be given a further opportunity of being heard by the Ld. CIT(E) in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice as the orders impugned are admittedly ex parte order without considering ... thus, set aside the issue in both the matters before us to the Ld. CIT(E) to consider the same afresh upon granting opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file

Radha Govind Charitable Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 752/AHD/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Mar 2024

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 752 & 753/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Na) Radha Govind Charitable Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Trust Tax (Exemption), Vs. Plot No.3, Sankalp House, Ahmedabad Nr. Rajpath Club, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaetr2408R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 25/01/2024 Hearing 25/01/2024 (Signed By The Jm On घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 20/03/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Two Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 08.08.2023 & 01.08.2023 Passed By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) (Cit(E)), Ahmedabad, Whereby & Whereunder The Applications For Approval Under Section 80G(5)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) & The Application For Registration Under Section 12A(1)(Ac)(Ii) Of The Act Respectively Were Rejected.

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT. DR
Section 1Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(ii)Section 80G(5)(iii)

facts and circumstances of both cases, we are of the opinion that the assessee is required to be given a further opportunity of being heard by the Ld. CIT(E) in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice as the orders impugned are admittedly ex parte order without considering ... thus, set aside the issue in both the matters before us to the Ld. CIT(E) to consider the same afresh upon granting opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file

Candid Industries Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 86/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.82 & 86/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2016-17) Candid Industries Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aaace4493Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/03/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69A

notices issued by NFAC. Subsequently the A.O without having any bonafde belief that the assessees income has escaped assessment and without providing proper opportunity of being heard and without considering facts and circumstances of the case has passed an erroneous Assessment Order u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B ... sequel to the assessment order back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to decide afresh after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the light of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, appeal filed

Candid Industries Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 82/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.82 & 86/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2016-17) Candid Industries Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aaace4493Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/03/2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69A

notices issued by NFAC. Subsequently the A.O without having any bonafde belief that the assessees income has escaped assessment and without providing proper opportunity of being heard and without considering facts and circumstances of the case has passed an erroneous Assessment Order u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B ... sequel to the assessment order back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to decide afresh after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the light of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, appeal filed

Addl CIT R G 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India Ltd ( Formerly Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd. ), Mumbai

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

Supreme Court has decided this issue as under:- "Under section 254, the Tribunal may after giving both the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit. The power of the Tribunal in dealing with appeals is, thus, expressed in the widest