“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

Banti Devi, Kotputli vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal is hereby dismissed

ITA 1326/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh choudhary, Addl. CIT a

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)Section 69A

residential address. But in fact no notice was received by the assessee at his correct address and this was the root of the ex-parte assessment made by the Assessing Officer. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee has index of paper book containing1

Uma Jagdish Hiremath, Pune vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Pune

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

ITA 188/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke

Section 144Section 147Section 148

date of receipt of order and accordingly the appeal was filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC on 22.02.2019. Since the ex-parte assessment order was served manually by hand to the assessee on 28.01.2019, the appeal was required to be filed on or before

Sama Jewellery Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 8(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3920/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 271ASection 68Section 69C

following grounds of appeal: “ 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte assessment order without providing fair opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Vishalkumar Hareshbhai Darbar, Botad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(8), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 2148/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Samir Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250

Saey stiches sifu, seneme aaite a’, sess | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD gm geacecad, wate wees

A Sirkar Co. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 12(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1718/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm D.C.I.T., Circle - 12(1), Kolkata A Sirkar Co. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 171/1A, Rash Behari Avenue, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata, Vs. Kolkata, West Bengal, 700019 West Bengal, 700069 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aacca3682P Assessee By : S/Shri Somnath Ghosh & Sarnath Ghosh, Ars Revenue By : Shri Jiendra Kantilal Surti, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025

For Appellant: S/shriFor Respondent: Shri Jiendra Kantilal Surti, DR

Section 143(1)Section 68

available on record, we find that the appeal has been decided ex- parte by CIT (A). similarly by ld. AO has framed the ex-parte assessment even without taking into account the opening cash in A Sirkar Co. Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2017-18 hand, which was very much available

Five Star Impex, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 4(2), Jpr, Jaipur

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

ITA 20/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalfive Star Impex, F-939, Road No. 14R, Vki Area, Jaipur 302021 Pan No.:Aabff2606A ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2), Jaipur ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. S. B. Natani, C.A, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Arvind Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 144Section 145Section 250Section 250(5)Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 68

aside the matter back to the file of the AO for de-novo assessment. As far as the issues involved in the ex-parte assessment, those have already been addressed by the assessee during the first appeal stage and rather there was a complete opportunity

Jayakumar, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kanchipuram

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

ITA 73/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.V.Padmanabhan, C.A ""For Respondent: Smt. Gouthami Manivasagam

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

notices u/s.142(1) & 142 of the Act to the assessee, but assessee failed to respond to the same. In fact, AO 2 made ex-parte assessment order by making an addition of Rs.50,000/- on account of cash deposits during demonetization in the assessee bank account treating as unexplained cash

Jagjeet Singh & Sons, Guwahati vs. ACIT Cir-2, Guwahati

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

ITA 216/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Adj. PetitionFor Respondent: Shri Kaushik Ray, DCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 68

Portal. (iv) That the Hon’ble CIT(A), NFAC erred in law as well as on facts of the case by confirming the ex-parte assessment made by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Act without service of any notice, which is against principles of natural justice

Ramkrushna Natha Agalme, Pune vs. ITO Ward 9(3) Pune, Pune

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

ITA 2246/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir JainFor Respondent: Shri Vishal A. Makawane

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

level as it involves verification of evidences etc. 2 ITA No.2246/PUN/2024, AY 2012-13 3] The Ld. AO has erred in passing an ex-parte assessment order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act determining income at Rs. 31,82,300/- without giving sufficient & proper opportunity of being heard

Maga Ram Choudhary, Pilerne vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

The appeal is ALLOWED for statistical purposes

ITA 4/PAN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji20 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Maga Ram Choudhary 6-1, M/S Magan Mistry, Opp. Vasudev Marble, Pilerna Industrial Estate, Goa Pan:Afzpc2295M . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Panaji. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 251(1)Section 69A

r.w.s. 147 of the Act, in view of proviso to section 251(1) of the Act the Ld. NFAC flawlessly adjudicated the ex-parte assessment in a best possible manner by remanding the same for de-novo adjudication. We have heard the rival party’s submission. We note that

Dhirendra Singh, Mirzapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(1), Mirzapur

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

ITA 133/ALLD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2015-16 Dhirendra Singh V. Income Tax Officer Mangraha, Chunar Ward 3(1) Mirzapur Mirzapur Pan:Bipps5569C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Brij Bhushan Goenka, C.A. Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 03 2025

For Appellant: Shri Brij Bhushan Goenka, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69A

assessment order itself contained the details of service of notice under section 143(2) of the Act and on the issue of ex-parte assessment, he ITA No.133/ALLD/2024 Page 6 of 11 held that since the additional evidence had been admitted under Rule 46A of the Rules, the ground

Rajeev Gupta L/H Ramesh Chandra Gupta, Kanpur vs. ITO-3(3), Kanpur

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

ITA 369/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2012-13 Rajeev Gupta V. The Income Tax Officer 3(3) Legal Heir Of Late Ramesh Kanpur Chandra Gupta 133/118, Transport Nagar Kanpur Nagar Tan/Pan:Aiypg8690G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18 03 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 03 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

30/03/2024, is bad in law. ITA No.369/LKW/2024 Page 4 of 7 5. That the learned Assessing officer has erred in completing the ex-parte assessment order on the deceased assessee, i.e., Ramesh Chandra Gupta who expired on 04-08-2016. The same error was also made by the CIT (Appeal

Amit Dhanomal Haryani, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Kolhapur

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

ITA 1539/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 68

during the course of penalty proceedings, however, the assessee failed to comply to the said notice(s) which led to completion of ex-parte assessment by the Ld. AO levying penalty of Rs.16,70,12,560/- u/s 271AAD of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before

Shaileshbhai Maganbhai Dhorajia, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward- 3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2079/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri SN Divatia with Shri Samir Vora, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250

grounds of appeal:- 1.1 The order passed U/s.250 on 18-10-2024 by NFAC[CIT(A)], Delhi. (for short CIT(A)" upholding the ex-parte assessment u/s 144 and confirming the disallowance of Rs. 44,70,242/- in respect of interest expenses is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles ... notice of hearing issued on 11.10.2024. 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding the ex-parte assessment u/s 144 and confirming the disallowance of Rs. 44,70,242/ in respect of interest expenses. 3.2 That the in the facts and circumstances

Adarsh Credit Cooperative Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur

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

ITA 10/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

Section 144Section 86

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH (Virtual) JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND DR

Shri Ghanshyambhai Samjibhai Vansjaliya, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3 (1) (1), Rajkot

ITA 947/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.947/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Ghanshyambhai Samjibhai Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3, (1) Vansjaliya, (1) 22, Samrat Ind. Area C/O Anand Rajkot - 360001 Plastic, B/H. S.T. Work Shop, Gondal Road, Rajkot - 360004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aegpv7291E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Pungalia , Ld Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04/03 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/ 03/2025

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Pungalia , Ld CIT(DR)

Section 139Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 251Section 44A

assessment has been finalised ex-parte by passing order under section 144 r.w.s.147 of the act. In the said ex-parte assessment order framed by the Ld AO Ward 3 (1)(3), Rajkot made addition of Rs.2195135 /- on account of cash deposits in the order passed under section 144rws147

Amina Nathu Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-26(1)-1, Mumbai

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

ITA 543/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Rupal ShrimalFor Respondent: 11.03.2025

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 68

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in not appreciating that the ex-parte Assessment made by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was bad in law as no notices were received by her physically

Amitkumar Shah, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1290/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1290/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Amit Kumar Shah, I.T.O., 63, Ram Nagar Society, Bhestan, Ward 2(3)(1), बनाम Surat-395023 (Gujarat) Surat Vs Pan : Clkps 7848 P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 115BSection 250Section 254(1)

ultimately decree of divorce was passed. The assessee is really interested in perusing his appeal on merit. The Assessing Officer (AO) also passed ex-parte assessment order. The ld CITT(A) also passed ex-party order without discussing merits of the case. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that

Ramakrishna Housingg, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 515/VIZ/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.515/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Ramakrishna Housingg Vs. Income Tax Officer Vijayawada Ward-2(1) [Pan : Aasfr5923P] Vijayawada (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri B.Srinivasa Rao & Ors. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/03/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 13/03/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.11.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2022-23. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm, Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate Development, Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y.2022-23 On 31.12.2022, Declaring Loss Of Rs.1,28,297/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The 2 Ramakrishna Housingg Assessing Officer (“The Ao”) Issued Notice U/S 142(1) & 143(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”) On Various Dates & Called Upon The Assessee To File Relevant Evidences, In Support Of Return Of Income Filed For The Year Under Consideration. The Assessee Neither Appeared, Nor Filed Any Evidences, Therefore, The Ao Issued Show Cause Notice & Called Upon The Assessee To Explain, As To Why The Assessment Proceedings Shall Not Be Completed In Terms Of Section 144 Of The Act. Once Again, The Assessee Did Not Furnish Any Details As Called For By The Ao. Therefore, The Ao Passed Ex-Parte Best Judgment Assessment Order U/S 144 Of The Act On 05.03.2024 & Determined Total Income At Rs.61,64,11,609/- By Making Various Additions To The Returned Loss.

For Appellant: Shri B.Srinivasa Rao & OrsFor Respondent: : Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 144

order of the Ld.CIT(A), submitted that the assessee is non-cooperative at all stages of proceedings, which is evident from the ex-parte assessment order passed by the Ld.AO and the Ld.CIT(A). The assessee could not adduce any reason as to why there is no representation during

Jamilhusen Abdullatif Vijapura, Sabarkantha vs. The ITO, S.K. Ward-3, Himatnagar

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

ITA 100/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.100/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jamilhusen Abdullatif The Ito बनाम/ Vijapura S.K. Ward-3 V/S. At Lalpur, Po Savgadh, Himatnagar – 383 001 Himatnagar – 383 001 (Gujarat) Sabarkantha (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Ahepv 6442 J (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Varis Isani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Varis Isani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

r.w.s 144 without issuing notice u/s.143(2) of the Income Tax Act may kindly considered as bad in law. 4. The ex-parte assessment order may kindly be considered as passed on account of gross violation of principle of natural justice. 5. Stay against recovery of demand may please