← All Phrases

“violation of natural justice”

Natural JusticeAudi Alteram PartemAudi Alteram Partem881 judgments

The decision most relied on for violation of natural justice is Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (125 ITR 713), cited in 962 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on violation of natural justice

Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT
125 ITR 713 · 1980 · Supreme Court
962
citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to be confronted with evidence used against them and to an opportunity for cross-examination, especially when that evidence is from a third party or a retracted statement. Failure to provide such an opportunity violates the principles of natural justice.

CIT v. Ashwani Gupta
322 ITR 396 · 2010 · High Court
262
citing judgments

Proceedings become fatal if principles of natural justice are violated, such as when seized material is not provided to the assessee or cross-examination of a person whose statement the Assessing Officer relies upon is denied.

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT
317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Orders that are inordinately delayed are liable to be recalled and heard afresh, and the Appellate Tribunal President should frame guidelines for timely disposal of appeals.

Vijay Shrinivasrao Kulkarni v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
171 Taxmann.com 696 · 2025 · High Court
200
citing judgments

The ITAT fails to uphold natural justice when it doesn't address an infirmity regarding an assessee being denied a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the matter ex-parte.

H.R. Mehta v. ACIT
387 ITR 561 · 2016 · High Court
175
citing judgments

An assessment order is unsustainable if the Assessing Officer denies the assessee the opportunity to cross-examine deponents whose statements are relied upon or fails to provide the material used against them, as this violates principles of natural justice.

H.R. Mehta v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai
72 Taxmann.com 110 · 2016 · High Court
125
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must provide the assessee with all material relied upon for an addition or disallowance and an opportunity to cross-examine deponents or witnesses whose statements form the basis of the assessment. Failure to provide such an opportunity violates natural justice and invalidates the addition or disallowance.

Andaman Timber Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise
15 SCC 785 · 2016 · Supreme Court
91
citing judgments

An assessment order is invalid if it relies on statements of third-party witnesses without granting the assessee the opportunity to cross-examine them, as this constitutes a fundamental breach of natural justice. No addition can be sustained if based solely on un-cross-examined statements.

Additional Income-tax Officer v. Ponkunnam Traders
102 ITR 366 · 1976 · High Court
66
citing judgments

When an Income-tax Officer relies on third-party evidence to make an addition to an assessee's income, the assessee must be given an opportunity to cross-examine those parties. Failure to provide this opportunity violates natural justice and invalidates the addition.

Judgments citing violation of natural justice

Higher Education & Research Society, Kalyan vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 3107/MUM/2022[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3107 & 3108/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Higher Education & बिधम/ Cit(Exemption), Pune Room No. 322, 3Rd Floor, Research Society Vs. A/2, 503, Punyodaya Park, Income Tax Office, Pmt Near Don Basco School, Building, Shankar Seth Road, Adharwadi, Jai Road, Pune-411037. Kalyan (West)-421301. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabth2529Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Prakash Marathe Revenue By: Dr. Mahesh Akhade (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/02/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Action Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune Dated 30.09.2022, Wherein He Was Pleased To Reject The Applications Filed By The Assessee For Registration U/S 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) As Well As U/S 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Act. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Trust Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(E) Not Granting Proper Opportunity To The Assessee Before Rejecting The Application U/S 12Ab & 80G Of The Act. 3. The Assessee (Higher Education & Research Society) Is Registered Under Societies Registration Act, 1860 Vide Registration No. Mah/651/2013/Thane Dated 04/04/2013 As Well As Under Mumbai Public Trust Act, 1950 Vide Registration No. F/27205/Thane

For Appellant: Shri Prakash MaratheFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade (DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iii)

directions of the Ld. CIT(E), still rejecting the application citing non- filing of certain information which was not called for tantamount to violation of natural justice because it is akin to keep the assessee in the dark and later allege failure on part of assessee which according