← 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

Devansh Trade Link Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2451/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2451/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Devansh Trade Link Pvt. Ltd., Vs Ito Ward-2(1) Kolkata 2Nd Floor, Room No.6A, 19 Gc Avenue, Dharmatala, So Kolkata West Bengal-700013 Pan No. :Aaccd 7209 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Ray & Shri Trideep Nayak, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.08.2025, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. It Was The Submission That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte Without Affording Sufficient Opportunity Of Being Heard. It Was Also Submitted That The Assessee May Be Given One More Opportunity To Represent Its Case Before The Ld. Cit(A), So That The Assessee Could Be Able To Provide The Details Before The Ld. Cit(A) To Substantiate Its Case. 3. In Reply, Ld. Sr.Dr Supported The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) & The Ld. Ao. 4. We Have Considered The Rival Submissions. A Perusal Of The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Clearly Shows That The Ld.Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte. However, During The Course Of Hearing, The Financial Controller Of The Assessee, Who Appeared In Person, Requested

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Ray & Shri Trideep Nayak, ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

submission that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without affording sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was also submitted that the assessee may be given one more opportunity to represent its case before the ld. CIT(A), so that the assessee could be able ... this appeal are restored to the file of ld CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh. The assessee shall be provided adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the readjudication proceedings positively. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Hotels Diamond Glory Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2120/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2120/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Hotels Diamond Glory Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata 96A, Raja Ram Mohan Sarani Amherst Street, Kolkata-700009 Pan No. :Aacch 1629 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Prof. Jayant Nitra, Finance Controller Of The Assessee राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.07.2025 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. It Was The Submission That Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte Without Affording Sufficient Opportunity Of Being Heard. It Was Also Submitted That The Assessee May Be Given One More Opportunity To Represent Its Case Before The Ld. Cit(A), So That The Assessee Could Be Able To Provide The Details Before The Ld. Cit(A) To Substantiate Its Case. 3. In Reply, Ld. Sr.Dr Supported The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) & The Ld. Ao. 4. We Have Considered The Rival Submissions. A Perusal Of The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Clearly Shows That The Ld.Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte. However, During The Course Of Hearing, The Financial Controller Of The Assessee, Who Appeared In Person, Requested

For Appellant: Prof. Jayant Nitra, Finance Controller of the assesseeFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR

submission that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without affording sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was also submitted that the assessee may be given one more opportunity to represent its case before the ld. CIT(A), so that the assessee could be able ... this appeal are restored to the file of ld CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh. The assessee shall be provided adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the readjudication proceedings positively. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

Man Mohan Goenka, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 43(1), Kolkata

ITA 2111/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2111/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Man Mohan Goenka, 5A, Divine Bliss, 2/3, Judges Court Rd Alipore, West Bengal-700027 Pan No. :Admpg 2616 В (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) Vs Ito Ward-43(1), Kolkata निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश / Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 25.08.2025 By The Id. Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Id. Ar That The Notice Issued U/S.143(2) Of The Act In The Case Of The Assessee On 10.08.2018 Is Not Valid In Line With The Instruction Issued By The Cbdt In Instruction F No. 225/157/2017/Ita-Ii Dated 23.06.2017. Copy Of The Notice Issued U/S.143(2) Of The Act Dated 23.09.2019 Is Reproduced As Below :- भारत सरकार / Government Of India वित्त मंत्रालय / Ministry Of Finance आयकर विभाग / Income Tax Department Office Of The Income Tax Officer Ward 43(3), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "SMC" BENCH KOLKATA श्री जार्ज माथन