“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

The Anklav Mercantile Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., Anand vs. DCIT Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 685/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Preyashi Tated, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 249(2)Section 68Section 69Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

grounds of appeal before final appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (AO) passed an ex-parte assessment order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) in the case of the assessee, a Cooperative Credit Society, for the relevant assessment year

Soleone Tradelinks Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 603/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Malarkodi R., Sr. DR

Section 144

Income Tax Act (Act), the assessee failed to furnish any response or supporting documentation. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the ex-parte assessment under section 144 of the Act. Based on available information, 10% of the sales of ₹12,81,49,681/-, (amounting

Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart, Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Godhra

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1972/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 139Section 144Section 148Section 271ASection 69A

appeal and also filed a petition seeking condonation of delay in filing appeal. The assessee in his condonation application submitted that the ex-parte assessment order was served on the income tax portal, but was not communicated by the chartered accountant to the assessee. The assessee only became aware ... given complete responsibility of compliances to his tax consultant, who failed to respond to notices issued by the Department, leading to an ex-parte assessment and penalty order. The assessee firm was unaware of these orders until the bank accounts were attached by the Department, due to lack of communication

Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart, Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Godhra

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1971/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 139Section 144Section 148Section 271ASection 69A

M/S. Amritlaxmi Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 2553/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2553/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Amrit Laxmi Vincom Pvt. Ltd.,…………….…Appellant 23A, Netaji Subhash Road, Dalhousie, Room No. 10, 1St Floor, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal [Pan:Aaica5974A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………..…………..Respondent Ward-4(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri L.N. Dash, Addl. Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 3. The ld. CIT(Appeals) observed that the ld. Assessing Officer passed the ex-parte assessment order as the assessee could not explain the source and nature of transaction. The ld. Assessing Officer has added back an amount of Rs.13

Parshottambhai Shamjibhai Gajjar, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-4(2)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 588/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Parshottambhgai Shamjibhai Gajjar The Ito, Ward-4(2)(4) 75, Shastrinagar Vs. Now Ward-4(2)(3) Nr. Anandbaug Society Ahmedabad. Ghatlodia Ahmedabad. Pan : Bhtpg 0081 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jaimin Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

these notices or submit any explanation in response to the show cause notice issued under section 142(1) dated 14.10.2019, culminating in an ex-parte assessment under section 144 read with section 143(3) dated 22.11.2019. In the said assessment order, the AO recorded that during the demonetization period

Incometax Officer Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Haresh Dayashankar Shrivastav, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 684/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarassessment Year : 2017-18 Income-Tax Officer, Haresh Dayashankar Shrivastav, Vs Ward 3(3)(1), 35, Swetanjali Society, Nr. Ahmedabad Hasubhai Park, Satellite, Ahmedabad-380015 Pan : Bbpps 5719 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Arsh Shaikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar:

For Appellant: Shri Arsh Shaikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR

Section 142(1)Section 144

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the ex-parte assessment order passed under Section 144 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), relating to the Assessment Year ... required details. The Assessing Officer considered the above submission of the legal-heir of the assessee and proceeded with passing of an ex-parte assessment order by making addition of Rs.3,28,41,538/- in the name of the deceased-assessee and demanded tax thereon. 3. Aggrieved against the ex

Murugesan Krishnakumar, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

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

ITA 1359/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1359/Chny/2025 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri N.V.Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 147Section 69A

account maintained with UCO Bank but did not file a return of income for the relevant Assessment Year. Consequently, the A.O. passed an ex-parte assessment order, making an addition of Rs.67,90,000/- on account of unexplained cash deposits, as the assessee failed to furnish any details despite being

Pmg Integrated Communications Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-21(2), Delhi

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

ITA 6079/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 6079/Del/2024 (A.Y 2017-18) Pmg Integrated Communications Vs Acit Pvt. Ltd. Circle-21(2) 576, First Floor, Main Road, Delhi Chirag Delhi Above -9 To 9 Super Market, Delhi 110017 Pan: Aaecp3851B Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing 17/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/07/2025

Section 143(3)

circumstances, we condone the delay of 330 days in filing the present Appeal. 7. Brief facts of the case are that, an ex-parte assessment order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred

Rakesh Malhotra, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 391 & 392/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Rakesh Malhotra, The Ito, बनाम C/O Tej Mohan Singh, Ward-2(1), Advocate, Chandigarh Vs. 527, Sector 10, Chandigarh 160011 "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Aavpm7247C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 06.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 147Section 69

very outset, the Counsel of the assessee brought to the notice of the Bench that the ex-parte assessment order was passed u/s 144/147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(A) also has passed an ex- parte order because of the non-compliance of the assessee

Rakesh Malhotra, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/CHANDI/2025[2017-18 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jul 2025

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 147Section 69

Swaran Singh, Ambala vs. Income Tax Officer, Ambala, Haryana

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes

ITA 364/CHANDI/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 364/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Swaran Singh, Ito, बनाम Village-Rampur, Ambala P.O.Sarsher Sarsheri, Vs. Ambala 133001 "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Dcrps2676L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None ( Written Submissions) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2025 आदेश/Order Per Laliet Kumar, Jm : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.01.2025 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. From The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee, It Is Gathered That The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 144 Of The 364-Chd-2025 Swaran Singh, Ambala 2

For Appellant: None ( written submissions)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148

filed by the Assessee. From the record and submissions of 364-Chd-2025 Swaran Singh, Ambala 3 the assessee, it appears that the ex-parte assessment order in this case has been passed by the Assessing Officer without considering the documentary evidence produced by the Assessee which is in violation

Dinx Solutions Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 288/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 288/Del/2025 (A.Y 2017-18) Dinx Solutions Private Limited Vs Dcit, Circle 7(1) 701, 7Th Floor Deepali Building C. R. Building, 92, Nehru Place, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aadcd2409G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Taruntulsani, Adv Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2025

Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 69A

Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 12/06/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. An ex-parte assessment order came to be passed u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making addition

Vinod Kumar Sharma, Gangapurcity vs. The Income Tax Officer, Karauli

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

ITA 308/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.N. Sharma, Advocate (Thru: VH)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148oSection 151Section 69

departmental assessment proceedings, but the assessee has not bothered to defense himself for non compliance of these opportunities. Therefore, a show-cause for ex-parte assessment was issued vide letter dated 17.03.2023 fixed for compliance on 22.03.2022 but again the assessee has not been complied till date. 9. In view

Best Winners Insurance Services Private Limited, Salem vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle1(1), Salem

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1334/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1334/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. M/S. Best Winners Insurance – The Dcit, Services Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1), C1 First Floor, Salem. Thirumala Elite Apartment, Angammal Colony, Main Road, Salem-636 009. [Pan: Aaecb 3474 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T. S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 21.07.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T. S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr. Gauthami Manivasagam

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

served upon the assessee on 31.08.2018. Notices u/s.142(1) of the Act dated 16.05.2019 and SCN dated 23.11.2019 were issued upon the assessee. Ex-parte Assessment u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act completed in the case of the assessee on 07.12.2019 at an income of Rs.12,15,917/- by making

Sh.Sandeep Kaushik, Dehradun vs. ITO, W- 1(3), Dehradun

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

ITA 8/DDN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sandeep Kaushik Vs. Income Tax Officer, O Main Bazar, Pt Ward 1(3) Devduttmargkvikasnagar, Dehradun, Vikasnagar /Dehradun Uttarakhand 248142, Uttarakhand Pan: Auapk2126R Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Sh. A. S. Rana, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/07/2025 Order

Section 144Section 144BSection 147r

Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 19/11/2024 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. An ex-parte assessment order came to be passed on 27/03/2023 u/s 147read with Section 144 & Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short

Bal Krishna Tiwari, Delhi vs. Raman Chawla, Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 3593/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 3593/Del/2024 (A.Y 2017-18) Bal Krishna Tiwari Vs. Raman Chawla, H No. 8774 Multanidhanda, Income Tax Officer, Gali No. 4, Paharganj, New Ward 63(4) Civic Centre, Delhi Minto Road, New Delhi Pan: Admpt6520H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv& Sh. Shammi Kapoor, Adv & Sh. Shauarya Jain, Ca Revenue By Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/07/2025

Section 143(3)

Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 10/06/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. An ex-parte assessment order came to be passed on 19/12/2019 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions

Shri Devinder Parkash Vijay, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-44(5), Delhi

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 157 days in filing

ITA 2096/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Krishna Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL

Abhay Hargovindbhai Patel, Jamnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 17/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 17/Rjt/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Abhay Hargovindbhai Patel Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 305, Dwarkeshdham,B/H. Samudra 1(3), Jamnagar Sales, Rajnagar, Aerodram Road, 1St Floor, Taranjali Building, Pn Jamnagar 361006 Marg, Aubpp7196D Jamnagar 361008 (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/07/2025 आदेश / Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Vide Order Dated 08/11/2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer, Dated 26/11/2019, U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Page 1

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. (DR)

Section 120(5)Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

learned Assessing Officer has erred on facts and in law in not considering the submissions of the assessee while passing an ex-parte assessment order under section 144. 3. The learned Assessing Officer has erred on facts and in law in making addition of Rs. 40,16,900/- by considering

Atul Rameshchandra Lokhandwala, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 212/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year : 2016-17 Atul Rameshchandra The Ito Lokhandwala Ward-2(3)91) V/S. D-24, Balaji Nagar Surat – 395 001 Piplod, Surat – 395 007 Pan: Aakpl 3829 Q

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)

assessment order makes it clear that the assessee failed to response to the various notices which has resulted in passing the ex-parte assessment order. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities with a direction