← 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

Sharda Devi Singh, Raipur vs. ITO, Mahasamund

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 632/RPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 632/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sharda Devi Singh, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/O Shri Shailendra Singh, Aayakar Bhawan, K-8, Rajdhani Vihar, Saddu, Mahasamund- 493445, Raipur-492001, C.G. C.G. Pan: Clzps1287D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri R. B. Doshi, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 69

Rs.76,99,000/- has escaped assessment as the assessee was a ‘Non-filer’. During the reopened assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO provided many opportunities of being heard as detailed on page 1 of the assessment order to explain the source of cash 2 Sharda Devi Singh vs. ITO-Mahasamund deposits ... response 6. As seen from the above, it is clearly evident that the appellant was provided with sufficient time and adequate number of opportunities of being heard, but in vain. Accordingly, I am of the considered view that no useful purpose will be served in keep on adjourning the case

Mainstream School for Autism & Special Care Foundation, Patna vs. CIT (Exemption), Patna

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 407/PAT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.406&407/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Mainstream School For Autism & Special Care Foundation……...……………………………. …………………....Appellant C-18, Shri Krishna Puri, Near Basawan Park, Boring Road, Patna- 800001.. [Pan: Aancm1550D] Vs. Cit, Exemption, Patna……..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Choudhury, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 07, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: Both The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 11.08.2025 Passed By The Cit(Exemption), Patna Rejecting Final Registration U/S 12A & Regular Approval U/S 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Relating To Registration & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

Section 12ASection 80G

issues back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) with a direction to re-examine the issues afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to comply all notices and submit all the relevant documents/details during the remand proceedings for granting

Mainstream School for Autism & Special Care Foundation, Patna vs. CIT (Exemption), Patna

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 406/PAT/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.406&407/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Mainstream School For Autism & Special Care Foundation……...……………………………. …………………....Appellant C-18, Shri Krishna Puri, Near Basawan Park, Boring Road, Patna- 800001.. [Pan: Aancm1550D] Vs. Cit, Exemption, Patna……..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Choudhury, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 07, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: Both The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 11.08.2025 Passed By The Cit(Exemption), Patna Rejecting Final Registration U/S 12A & Regular Approval U/S 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Relating To Registration & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

Section 12ASection 80G

issues back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) with a direction to re-examine the issues afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to comply all notices and submit all the relevant documents/details during the remand proceedings for granting

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Ritu Dhingra, Shakti Vihar, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and cross appeal of the Department are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 862/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: him:- (a) That the assessment order dated 31.03.2023 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153C is bad in law in as much no incriminating material was found suggesting any escapement of income at premises of Sh. Avtar Singh Kochhar. (b) That the assessment order passed is non-est and bad in law in as much the proceedings have not been conducted in the manner prescribed by the Department instructions from time to time which are mandatory for compliance by the Learned Authorities particularly with respect

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, CIT, DR
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153C(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 251(1)(a)

view, although the appellant has made non-compliance during assessment proceedings, as per principles of natural justice, one more opportunity of being heard needs to be granted. Under these facts and circumstances, and to meet the ends of justice, in my considered view, it would be appropriate if the impugned ... direction to decide the issues on merits in accordance with the law. 11.4 Needless to say, the Ld. CIT(A) shall afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law. 12. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee