“ex-parte assessment”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144Section 144871 judgments

The decision most relied on for ex-parte assessment is Vijay Shrinivasrao Kulkarni v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (171 Taxmann.com 696), cited in 200 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on ex-parte assessment

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.

Velu Palandar v. DCIT

83 ITR 683 · 1972 · High Court

citing judgments

The opportunity of hearing provided to an assessee must be real, effective, and realistic, not merely notional, and tax authorities are incumbent to decide cases on their merits after affording due opportunity.

Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship v. CIT (Exemptions)

463 ITR 560 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Service of notice through the ITBA portal is not a valid method of service under section 282(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and Rule 127(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Consequently, matters where notice was deemed invalidly served via ITBA portal are remanded to the Assessing Officer for a de novo disposal to uphold principles of natural justice.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. BIJU PATNAIK HIGH COURT OF ORISSA

190 ITR 396 · 1991 · High Court

citing judgments

An ex-parte statement recorded under section 131 cannot be used against an assessee without giving them an opportunity to present rebuttal evidence, as doing so violates the principles of natural justice and vitiates the assessment order.

Ashokji Chanduji Thakor v. Pr.CIT

130 Taxmann.com 131 · 2021 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

If an assessee is non-cooperative throughout the assessment and appellate proceedings, despite multiple opportunities, the authorities are justified in deciding the proceedings ex-parte based on the available material.

PCIT v. Drisha Impex (P.) Ltd.

173 Taxmann.com 571 · 2025 · High Court

citing judgments

A High Court decision upholding additions made by the Assessing Officer for non-genuine purchases is affirmed when an SLP against it is dismissed by the Supreme Court. The Assessing Officer's addition for alleged bogus purchases is justified and can be sustained.

Shivangi Steel (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income

42 Taxmann.com 393 · 2014 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Commissioner (Appeals) can pass an ex-parte assessment order under Section 251 read with Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, if the assessee fails to attend assessment proceedings or produce documents despite multiple notices and adjournments.

Ramesh K. Shah v. DCIT

82 TTJ 827 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer (AO) cannot rely solely on ex-parte details or data without cross-examination, especially when affidavits confirm no cash transactions.

Judgments citing ex-parte assessment

Sanjeev Garg, Kurukshetra vs. Income Tax Officer, Kurukshetra

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 871/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 871/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Sanjeev Garg, The Ito, House No. 297, Sector 13, Vs Kurukshetra. U.E., Kurukshetra. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afspg0180L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Navneet Singal, Ca & Shri Rittun Sahuwala, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Navneet Singal, CA and Shri Rittun Sahuwala, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

addition of Rs.20,45,000/- be not made in the hands of the assessee. Rest was misconstrued by the AO on account of ex-parte assessment but assessee has filed details before the CIT (Appeals). The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that these details were not filed before

Rajamuri Shivaraj, Mahabubnagar vs. ITO., Ward-1, Mahabubnagar

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

ITA 897/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena,Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

into bank account amounting to Rs.65,55,000/- without providing 4 ITA.No.897/Hyd./2025 adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and passed ex-parte assessment order dated 14.03.2022. Further, during the course of appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A), the learned CIT(A) has provided various opportunities

Ateequr Rahman, Nizamabad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Sangareddy

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

ITA 896/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sri Tejprakash Toshniwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena, Sr. AR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings with relevant documentary evidences and, therefore, the Assessing Officer had not option, except to pass ex-parte assessment order. During the course of appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) has issued notices on 5 occasions calling the 7 ITA.No.896/Hyd./2025 assessee ... orders of the authorities below. We find that, there is no dispute between the parties that the Assessing Officer has passed ex-parte assessment order u/sec.144 of the Act, by treating the return of income filed by the assessee

Mahesh Ramakant Gawde, Data Mandir Road Mumbai vs. ITO, 35(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4651/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Mr. Mahesh R. GawdeFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 56Section 69Section 69ASection 80

erred in passing the ex-parte appellate order and confirming the patently incorrect and wrong addition made by ld. Assessing Officer in the ex-parte assessment order passed u/s.144 wrongly treating and assessing the single purchase transaction of Flat No.21 in Ratnagaga CHS Ltd. at Broivali in Mumbai twice, first

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

selected for scrutiny and notice was issued by the Ld. AO. However, due to non-compliance by the assessee, Ld. AO passed an ex-parte assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B on 25.03.2024 after adding profit calculated @ 8% on unaccounted sales of Rs. 7,42,04,610/. Aggrieved with

Brij Mohan Joshi, Sendhwa vs. Ward Sendhwa, Sendhwa

In the result appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 351/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshibrij Mohan Joshi, Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 3, Behind Of Goi Wala Ward Sendhwa Vs. Building, Ram Katora Mohalla, Sendhwa

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 44ASection 68

grounds of appeal in the Form No.36 against the “impugned order” which are as under:- “1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte assessment order without allowing a proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard. The time allowed for compliance is also very short. 2.That on the facts

Hotel Priya, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed

ITA 127/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

Section 44A

NFAC/2016-17/10284614 for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessment in this case is an ex-parte assessment. The AO has made an addition of Rs.21,37,998/- representing the difference between the VAT return and the income tax return

The Amalorparvam Higher Sec, School Staff Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Pondicherry vs. ITO, Ward-1, Puducherry

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 2083/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2083/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Amalorpavam Higher Sec. School Staff Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd, No.1, Lourdes Campus, Vanarpet, Puducherry - 605 001. Ito Vs. Ward -1, Pondicherry. [Pan: Aaeat-5199-E] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. T. Vasudevan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-17, Vide Order Dated 16.05.2025. :-2-:

For Appellant: Mr. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यायिक

Manda Shantaram Garade, Talegaon Dabhade vs. Income Tax Officer 9(3), Akurdi

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

ITA 1343/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1343/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Manda Shantaram Garade, V The Assessing Officer, 66, Dhamane Gavthan, Near S Ward-9(3), Pune. Padmavati Mandir, Talegaon, Maharashtra – 410506. Pan: Bjcpg4762K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishit Gandhi(Virtual), Aadnya Bhandari(Present In Itat Pune Bench) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.03.2025 For The A.Y.2019-20 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151ASection 250Section 69A

escapement of income of Rs.22,03,000/-. 3. A notice u/s.148 was issued on 16.03.2023. Assessee failed to file any reply, accordingly, an Ex-parte Assessment Order was passed determining the total income of the Assessee at Rs.94,28,953/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order, Assessee filed appeal before

M/S. Shree Hari Builders, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 17(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4457/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No.4457/Mum/2025 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-2014) M/S. Shree Hari V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward Builders बिाम 17(3)(1), Mumbai 139 2Nd Floor, Seksaria Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Chambers, N.M. Road, 43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Fort, Mumbai 400023 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051 स्थायी लेखा सुं./जीआइआर सुं./Pan/Gir No: Aabfs2234F Appellant/अपीलाथी .. Respondent/प्रधिवादी धििााररिी की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, Ca (Virtually Appear) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr स िवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing 25.08.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2025 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 [Cit(A)] Dated 14.05.2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

erred in not allowing sufficient and reasonable opportunity of hearing to your Appellant and thereby further erred in completing the ex-parte assessment in haphazard manner without proper appreciation of facts, materials and evidences on record. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Rishabh Dev, Dehradun vs. ITO, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 136/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 271ASection 271BSection 272A(1)(d)

notices issued by the A.O. could be made and the notices were issued to the jail Superintendent which resulted in passing the ex-parte assessment order as well as order of penalty. The appellant came to know about passing the order belatedly, thereafter approached the ld. CIT(A) and filed

Rishabh Dev, Dehradun vs. ITO, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 135/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 271ASection 271BSection 272A(1)(d)

Rishabh Dev, Dehradun vs. ITO, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 134/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 271ASection 271BSection 272A(1)(d)

Rishabh Dev, Dehradun vs. ITO, W-1(2)(2), Dehradun

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 133/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 271ASection 271BSection 272A(1)(d)

Koshal Kishor Sharma, Jaipur vs. DCIT(Intl. Tax.) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 862/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT-DR

Section 147Section 148ASection 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

against Rs.12,45,390/- originally returned by assessee. Assessee contended that no notice under section 148 was served upon assessee and ex-parte assessment was completed without Koshal Kishor Sharma, Jaipur. serving any notice under section 148 till the completion of assessment which rendered the assessment order to be held