“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

Suchitra Shashikant Khavare, Hatkanangle, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ichalkaranji

The appeal is PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 1410/PUN/2024[AY 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Sept 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14 Suchitra Shashikant Khavare A/P: Shiroli Plachi, Tal.: Hatkalangle, Kolhapur-416122 Pan: Aowpk8959A. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ichalkaranji. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

barred by limitation. 3. Without touching the merits of the case we have heard the rival parties on the limited issue of ex-parte assessment and ex- parte dismissal of appeal by the Ld. NFAC and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused material placed on record, considered

Mahendra Singh, Sikar vs. ITO Ward Neem Ka Thana, Neem Ka Thana

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

ITA 440/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv.)

Section 144Section 147Section 149(1)(b)Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A

Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Assessing Officer grossly erred in passing the ex-parte Assessment Order by unlawfully invoking the provision of section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Telangana State Housing Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 553/HYD/2024[2017-2018]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad09 Sept 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.553/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Telangana State Housing Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Corporation Limited Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafct4920L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A. B Satyanarayana Murthy राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Cit (Dr) Shri B Bala Krishna सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 09/09/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: C.A. B Satyanarayana MurthyFor Respondent: : CIT (DR) Shri B Bala Krishna

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 46A

learned CIT (A) submitted that the assessee is non- cooperative at all stages of the proceedings which is evident from the ex-parte assessment order and appellate order passed by the authorities. The assessee could not explain as to why it has not appeared before the authorities. Therefore, there

Rajesh Chandwani, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer -3(3), Bhopal

ITA 248/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Indore06 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Rajesh Chandwani, Income-Tax Officer, New Sant Kabeer Traders, 3(3), Rahmat Market, Bhopal बनाम/ Ghora Nakkas, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Afdpc4229B Assessee By Shri Arpit Gaur, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 253(5)

issued notice u/s 144 making a proposal of best judgement assessment which also remained un-complied by assessee. Ultimately, the AO completed ex-parte assessment vide order dated 30.11.2019 u/s 144 after making an addition of Rs. 51,11,600/- on account of undisclosed capital gain equivalent to the value

Sumit Lalchand Pahuja, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward1(5), Kolhapur

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

ITA 273/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sumit Lalchand Pahuja, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(5), House No.2719, Gandhinagar, Kolhapur. Tal. Karveer, Dist. Kolhapur- 416119. Pan : Bohpp0806D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 27.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.09.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Merit In Confirming Additions Of Rs.1,03,90,206/- When The Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Bad In Law. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Merit In Confirming Additions Of Rs.1,03,90,206/- When Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Based On Erroneous Facts & Without Proper Application Of Mind By Assessing Officer As The Assessee Did Not Held Any Account With M/S Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Cooperative Credit Society Ltd.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

grounds of appeal. It is also seen that the notices were issued through ITBA portal only. It is further found that the ex-parte assessment was made during the covid pandemic period. In the grounds of appeal it was claimed by the assessee that he did not have any bank

Venkataraju Chandrashekar, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1351/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, A.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 54Section 69

conversant with the technology and could not check his e-mails without assistance and therefore, the AO had passed the ex-parte assessment order. The ld. A.R’s contention is that the assessment order came to the knowledge of the assessee only when the assessee’s A.R. logged into

Shri Dinesh Chhaganlal Dave, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3, Satara

ITA 995/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2018-19 Dinesh Chhaganlal Dave 680, Main Road, Dahiwadi, Tal.-Man, Satara-415508 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Aompd7646H

For Appellant: None for the assesseeFor Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 148Section 250

appeal ex-parte u/r 24 of ITAT- Rules, 1963. 3. We have heard Ld. DR and submission made on the limited issue of ex-parte assessment and ex-parte dismissal of appeal by the first appellate authority; and subject to provisions of rule 18 of ‘ITAT Rules’ perused material placed ... assessment ex-parte to the best of his judgement u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. Aggrieved assessee instituted an appeal against such ex-parte assessment before Ld. NFAC on 29/03/2023 wherein the first appellate authority provided three opportunity of hearing to the assessee vide notices dt. 12/12/2023, 07/02/2024 & 20/02/2024

Sri. Balaji Steel and Cement, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-3(2)(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1380/BANG/2024[21/05/2024]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Sri Balaji Steel & Cement, Vs. Ito, No.2328, 1St Block, Ward – 3(2)(3), Str M Visvesuvarua Layout, Bengaluru. 100 Feet Road, Maruthi Nagae, Bengaluru – 560 056. Pan : Aczfs 2919 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Lakshmi S, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. S. T. Seshadri, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2024 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav-

For Appellant: Ms. Lakshmi S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. S. T. Seshadri, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

several notices under section 144 of the Act to the assessee. All these notices remained un-complied and hence the AO framed an ex-parte assessment. During assessment, the AO observed that the assessee has deposited cash to the tune of Rs.71,19,395/- after demonetization. The AO further observed

Suresh Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(5), Meerut

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

ITA 1051/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Suresh Singh, Vs Ito, C/O-Sanjiv Sapra & Associates Llp, Ward -1(2)(5), Chartered Accountants, C-763, Meerut. New Friends Colony, New Delhi-110025. Pan-Atzps1024N Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sanjiv Sapra, Ca Respondent By Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 19.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27.08.2024

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

Meerut were received by me and consequently, no compliance could be made during the course of assessment proceedings. 6. That the ex-parte assessment order u/s 147/144 dated 22/11/2019 has been passed by ITO, Ward 2(5), Meerut in complete violation of principles of natural justice and without even considering

Santosh Shantilal Muthiyan, Aurangabad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Aurangabad

ITA 948/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2011-12 Santosh Shantilal Muthiyan Shanti Bunglow, Juna Bazar, Aurangabad-431001 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Abfpm6512R

For Appellant: Smt Deepa Khare [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 250

deem it fit to condone the same and advanced accordingly. 3. We have heard rival submission on the limited issue of ex-parte assessment and ex-parte dismissal of appeal by the first appellate authority; and subject to provisions of rule 18 of ‘ITAT Rules’ perused material placed on record ... assessment ex-parte to the best of his judgement u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. Aggrieved assessee instituted an appeal against such ex-parte assessment before Ld. NFAC on 08/01/2019 wherein the first appellate authority provided as many as nine opportunity of hearing to the assessee right from

Manish Sobhagmal Bajaj, Chandrapur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Chandrapur

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

ITA 237/NAG/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Tejprakash ToshniwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 144Section 69A

appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “That the Commissioner of Income tax appeal order in confirming the ex-parte assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chandrapur for the assessment year 2017-2018 under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act is quite contrary

Vijaykumar Shankarlal Malpani, Jalgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Jalgaon

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

ITA 997/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.997/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vijaykumar Shankarlal Vs The Income Tax Officer, Malpani, Ward-1(3), Jalgaon. Plot No.25, Sadguru Nagar, Meharun, Jalgoan – 425001. Maharashtra. Pan: Aftpm0800N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nemin Shah - Ar Revenue By Shari Sandeep P Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20/08/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 11.03.2024 For The A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) – Nfac Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs.10,92,448/- Vijaykumar Shankarlal Malpani [A]

Section 115BSection 250Section 69A

issued notices to the assessee, however, according to the AO, assessee failed to comply the notices and hence AO passed an ex-parte assessment order making addition of Rs.14,89,900/- u/sec.69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order, assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A). 4.1 Before

Mrs Puja Chander, Port Blair vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Port Blair

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

ITA 264/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 6Section 69A

Assessing Officer in response to the first date of notice and thereafter did not appear. The ld. Assessing Officer has passed an ex-parte assessment order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act. This section authorizes the ld. Assessing Officer to pass a best judgment assessment. The ld. Assessing

Pareshkumar Punamchand Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1096/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: CA Preyashi TatedFor Respondent: Shri Hrishikesh Hemant Patki, Sr. D.R

Section 144Section 250Section 253(3)

notice as well to notices issued by the AO u/s 148 and 142(1) to the assessee, and the AO proceeded to frame ex-parte assessment u/s 144 of the 1961 Act, by making additions to the tune of Rs.29,93,000/- to the income of the assessee towards undisclosed ... appellant read as under: “ The Ld. AO has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not allowing sufficient opportunity before making ex-parte assessment us. 144. The Ld. AO has failed to appreciate that there was sufficient cause for failure to comply with the alleged notices of hearing

Laxmi Co. Operative Credit Society Limited, Mehsana vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Patan

In the result, the Stay Petition filed by the assessee is allowed with a direction not to recover the tax demand till the disposal of the appeal by the Ld

ITA 1101/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the ex-parte assessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year

Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. I.T.O., -2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4811/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. RAJ

Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4755/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 144rSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. RAJ

Jayashri Prakash Kacholiya, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tiruchengode

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

ITA 1537/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1537/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2017-18

For Respondent: Shri G.Suresh, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 250Section 69A

duty of the assesse to file the return in such time as specified in the notice. Section 144(1)(b) prescribes invocation of ex-parte assessment proceedings u/s 144 in cases where an assesse does not files the return of income u/s 142(1). Before us the assesse has also

Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Gondia vs. Shri Satishkumar Madanlal Gupta, Gondia

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the ay 2009–10 stands dismissed

ITA 29/NAG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri M.K.M. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 69A

days. The appellant neither submitted return in response to 148 notice nor submitted requisite details sought under section 142(1). Finally, an ex-parte assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer as the assessee failed to file return of income and submit requisite details. The Assessing Officer added

Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Gondia vs. Shri Satishkumar Madanlal Gupta, Gondia

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the ay 2009–10 stands dismissed

ITA 28/NAG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri M.K.M. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 69A