← All Phrases

“audi alteram partem”

Natural JusticeAudi Alteram PartemAudi Alteram Partem490 judgments

The decision most relied on for audi alteram partem is 372 92.(2019) 13 SCC 185: MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA v. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS 93 (1 SCC 248), cited in 176 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on audi alteram partem

372 92.(2019) 13 SCC 185: MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA v. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS 93
1 SCC 248 · 1978 · Reported
176
citing judgments

Audi alteram partem, or the right to be heard, is a fundamental principle of natural justice that applies to all quasi-judicial proceedings, including those before tax authorities.

Rajesh Kumar v. DCIT
287 ITR 91 · 2006 · Supreme Court
121
citing judgments

When a statutory authority takes action that can lead to civil or adverse consequences for an individual, the principles of natural justice, particularly the right to be heard (audi alteram partem), must be implicitly followed, even if the relevant statute does not expressly provide for it.

GTC Industries Ltd. v. ACIT
65 ITD 380 · 1998 · ITAT
119
citing judgments

Formal cross-examination of witnesses who make adverse reports is not an invariable requirement of natural justice (audi alteram partem) in income tax proceedings. Assessees must have a fair opportunity to meet adverse evidence, but this does not mandate formal cross-examination.

Sahara India (Firm,) Lucknow v. Commissioner of Income Tax
14 SCC 151 · 2008 · Reported
106
citing judgments

This case establishes principles for determining the validity of a special audit direction issued under Section 142(2A) and its impact on the extended period of limitation under Section 153(3) Explanation 1(iii), often considered in the context of natural justice.

Director, ECIL v. B. Karunakar (1993) 4 SCC 727; Haryana Financial Corporation v. Kailash Chandra Ahuja
3 SCC 364 · 1996 · Reported
93
citing judgments

Procedural irregularities, especially where initiation was valid but completion was flawed, are often curable and may not automatically invalidate an entire order. This principle, tied to natural justice, means minor defects in procedure can be remedied without voiding the proceedings.

Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
4 SCC 379 · 1980 · Reported
62
citing judgments

Even a purely administrative order that entails civil consequences must adhere to the principles of natural justice, particularly the rule of audi alteram partem, ensuring a fair hearing. The concept of 'civil consequences' broadly encompasses any impact on a citizen's civil life, beyond just property or personal rights.

International Forest Co. v. CIT
101 ITR 721 · 1975 · High Court
54
citing judgments

In a best judgment assessment, tax authorities cannot act arbitrarily or base conclusions solely on guesswork; additions must be supported by evidence or material on record, and principles of natural justice require communicating adverse material to the assessee.

Lalchand Bhagat Ambikaram v. CIT
83 ITR 508 · 1972 · High Court
53
citing judgments

The principle of natural justice, specifically the right to be heard (audi alteram partem), must be strictly followed in quasi-judicial proceedings. An assessment order is invalid if the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-examine third parties whose statements or evidence form the basis for additions.

Judgments citing audi alteram partem

Vinay Dalchand Mehta, Dombivali vs. Income Tax Officer Pne-W-(75)(94), Kalyan

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

ITA 4430/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrivinay Dalchand Mehta Income Tax Officer Pne Flat No. 7, Moreshwar Cooperative Ward (75)(94) Vs. Housing Society Limited, R.P. Road, 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion Dombivli, 421201 Kalyan Murbad Road, Above Canara Bank, Kalyan 421301 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aazpm0583F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से / Assessee By: Shri. Sumedh Hinge /Revenue By: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M]: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 27.03.2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Act"] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Sumedh HingeFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik SR. DR
Section 2Section 250Section 44A

held that Article 14 guarantees a right of hearing to a person who is adversely affected by an administrative order. The principle of audi alteram partem is a part of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Considering the said decision, the Appellant ought to have been granted an opportunity