“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

Babubhai Joitaram Patel, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT/ACIT Cent-1, RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 23/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.15&23/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Babubhai Joitram Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax/ 9 Suvas Colony St Xaviers High Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, School Road. Gujarat-380 014 Central Circle –1, Rajkot, Income Tax Officer, Amruta Estate Building, M.G. Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdpp5355 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (DR)

Section 153CSection 250

Hence, the notice and assessment order must be quashed. ITA Nos. 15 & 23/RJT/2025 A.Ys 18-19 & 19-20 Babubhai J Patel Ground-2 Ex-parte Assessment and Violation of Natural Justice The Ld. AO erred in law and on facts of the case in proceeding ex-parte and passing

Babubhai Joitaram Patel, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT/ACIT Cent-1 RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 15/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (DR)

Section 153CSection 250

Padinjarethil Shamsudheen, Palakkad vs. ITO, Ward 2, Palakkad

ITA 358/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing: 13.06.2025

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 282(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ITA

Amjad Usman Khan, Thane vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1973/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50CSection 54

addition of Rs. 3,36,49,000/- as undisclosed capital gain. 5. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, set aside the ex-parte assessment order and restored the matter to the file of the AO with a direction 4 to frame a fresh assessment in accordance with law. Being ... file of the AO for de novo consideration pursuant to the appeal filed by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) against the ex-parte assessment order, all the contentions of the assessee, on jurisdiction as well as on merits of the addition, are open. Therefore, we do not find

Pragaram Devasi, Bhosari, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(1) Pune, Akurdi

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

ITA 1048/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

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

deposited in the account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. 4. Against the above ex-parte assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before first appellate authority. Since the assessee 4 remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed

Abdul Rauf Gani Ghone, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 14(3), Pune

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

ITA 1052/PUN/2025[17-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jul 2025

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1052/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Abdul Rauf Gani Ghone, V The Income Tax Officer, Sr.No.50/1-A, Gali No.3, S Ward-14(3), Pune. Bhagyadey Nagar, Pune – 411048. Maharashtra. Pan: Afrpg3750P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak-Ar & Mrs.Archena Shetty-Advocate Revenue By Shri Arvind Renge –Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 29/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 19.02.2025, Emanating From Order U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 07.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 69

profile of the appellant. However, the appellant has remained unaware of the proceedings of the assessment, accordingly without any fault of his, an ex-parte assessment has been completed and unjustified additions have been made, which have debarred him of his night of equality before law and reasonable opportunity

Apsara Oswal, Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi

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

ITA 580/DEL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Pareekassessment Year : 2019-20

Section 144Section 144C(3)Section 250

participated in the assessment proceedings. SCN was also issued by the assessee, but again there was no compliance. The AO passed an ex-parte assessment order in which he disallowed indexed cost of acquisition of property claimed by the assessee,as well cost of acquisition of the Mutual Funds were

DCIT, Int.Tax.Circle, Gurgaon vs. Anil Kumar Goel, Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1103/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271ASection 68

proceedings Page 5 of 9 ITA No. 1103/DEL/2022 [A.Y 2017-18] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Goel and taxed in the Ex-parte assessment order have been taxed during the previous years. It is quite evident from the copies of form

Late Aniceto Anacleto Pereira L/S Palmira Isabella Pereira, Miramar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Panaji

ITA 308/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Ms Eesha Dukle [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 251(1)Section 253(1)Section 69A

NFAC without going into the merits of the case, at the threshold culminated the proceedings by setting aside the ex-parte assessment passed u/s 144 of the Act for de-novo assessment. Further aggrieved by the impugned first appellate 5. order, the appellant legal heir is in appeal following grounds ... NFAC, however in view of the proviso to section 251(1) of the Act, the Ld. NFAC set- aside the ex-parte assessment for de-novo assessment. Further we also note that, while arriving to such conclusion in relation to remanding the assessment proceeding for fresh assessment the Ld. NFAC

Amar Singh Village Darba Kalan, Sirsa Haryana, Sirsa vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sirsa

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 46/CHANDI/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: The Cit(A) & Without Giving Any Further Opportunity, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee On Technical Ground I.E. On Account Of Delay In Filing The Appeal Which Is Not Proper. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate That The Assessee Being Illiterate Not Conversant With The Email Facility And, As Such, He Was Handicapped In Not Filing The Appeal Within Time

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147

case are that the assessee, Shri Amar Singh, is an individual. For the Assessment Year 2013–14, the Ld. AO passed an ex-parte assessment order dated 19.03.2022 under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, determining the total income of the assessee

Suresh, Pinjore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panchkula

In the result both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 1149/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

show-cause notice under Section 144, the assessee failed to respond or furnish details. Consequently, the AO framed an ex-parte assessment under Section 144, treating the cash deposits as unexplained credits under Section 68 and added Rs. 10,04,000/- to the assessee’s taxable income. Penalty proceedings under

Suresh, Pinjore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Panchkula

In the result both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 1148/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

Raymalbhai Gokalbhai Patel, Banaskantha vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Palanpur

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 286/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.286/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Raymalbhai Gokalbhai Patel The Ito बनाम/ Dhakha, Taluka Dhanera Ward-1 V/S. Banaskantha – 385 310 Palanpur – 385 310 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Cthpp 2593 P (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ars Revenue By : Shri Uday Krishanrao Kakne, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 24/07/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Raymalbhai Gokalbhai Patel Vs. Ito Asst.Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia &For Respondent: Shri Uday Krishanrao Kakne, Sr.DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 69A

post Corona period. However, as explained above, the C.A. appointed by the assessee did not participate in the proceedings resulting into an ex-parte assessment order. It has, therefore, been requested that in view of the above facts and considering that the assessee is a farmer and illiterate person

Gopalbhai Chelaji Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 1392/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1390/Ahd/2024, 1391/Ahd/2024 & 1392/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively Gopalbhai Chelaji Prajapati The Ito बनाम/ A-401, Sarvopari Elegance Ward-2(1)(1) V/S. Opp.Satya Apartment Ahmedabad-380 015 Akash Residency Cross Road New Ranip Ahmedabad – 382 470 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Agapp 3191 P (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.F. Jain, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 271(1)(b)

were sent at old address of the assessee and, hence, the same were not received by the assessee resulting into ex-parte assessment orders of the AO passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act. The Ld.Counsel has further demonstrated that even the assessee was not served with the assessment orders

Gopalbhai Chelaji Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 1391/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 271(1)(b)

Gopalbhai Chelaji Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 1390/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 271(1)(b)

Shivratan Motilalji Rathi HUF, Pune vs. ITO, Jalna

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

ITA 604/PUN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.604/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shivratan Motilalji Rathi Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Jalna. Huf, Rathi Rathi & Co., 501-504, Akshay Landmarks, Opp. Pu La Garden, Sinhagad Road, Jalna- 411030. Pan : Aaehr5318G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Miss Smruti Sabnis Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.10.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “Ground 1. The Appellant Requests Your Honor To Condone The Delay Of 64 Days In Filing The Appeal As The Delay Was Due To Unforeseen Circumstances Beyond The Control Of The Appellant.

For Appellant: Miss Smruti SabnisFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva

Section 142(1)Section 142ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. 5. Against the above ex-parte assessment order, the assessee HUF preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee HUF neither furnished its return of income nor paid any advance tax, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC

Sumitra Builders and Developers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-22(2), Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 378/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 378/Del/2025 (A.Y 2015-16) M/S Sumitra Builders & Vs Dcit Developerspvt. Ltd. Circle-22(2) Dsc-260, South Court, Dlf, C. R. Building Saket, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aajcs4693K Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2025

Section 147

Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 27/09/2024 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. An ex-parte assessment order came to be passed u/s 147 read with Sections 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions

Aroleen Softech and Engineering Private Limited, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer - 1(1), Indore

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

ITA 116/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiaroleen Softech & Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Engineering Private 1(1), Vs. Limited, Indore 270 Shastri Market, Indore (Pan: Aajca4128P) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri Apurva Mehta, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 246ASection 250Section 253

case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in upholding the additions made by the Ld. AO made vide Ex-Parte Assessment Order dated 14.11.2019, without providing proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard and thus, the Ex-Parte Order of the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC

Madhya Pradesh Building and Other Construction Welfare Board, Bhopal vs. DCIT(Exemption), Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 382/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2017-18 Madhya Pradesh Building Dcit (Exemption) & Other Construction Bhopal Welfare Board, बनाम/ 82- Harshvardhan Nagar, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan:Aaalm0795N Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौर"ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND