← All Phrases

“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
94
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
75
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
23
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
22
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
22
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
14
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
12
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

Alpine Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Indore vs. NFAC, Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 65/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2013-14 Alpine Infracon Private A.O., Limited, Nfac, G-110, Yashwant Plaza, Delhi बनाम/ Opp. Railway Station, Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aahca4782F Assessee By Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.07.2024

Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर "ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

Pukhraj Bhomaji Mutha, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(2)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 2150/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaravs. Ito -19(2)(5), Pukhraj Bhomaji Mutha, Piramal Chambers, 1605, Siddesh Darshan, Lalbaug, 10Th Khetwadi, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Aacpm4077H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 144Section 148

attended and not complied by him that too without my knowledge or intimation to me which has led the passing of ex-parte assessment orders for all the aforesaid assessment years by the Id. Id. Income Tax Officer- 19(2)(5), Mumbai u/s.144 r.w.s ... appeal: 1. That both the Id. CIT (Appeal), NFAC and Id. Assessing Officer have erred on facts and in law in passing the ex-parte assessment order and appellate order without giving proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard. 2. That the Id. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT (Appeal) have

Rati Ram Yadav, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 3(5), Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 753/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C. N.Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(b)

short, the ‘AO’) provided sufficient opportunities of being heard. Since there was no compliance during the reopened assessment proceedings; therefore, the AO completed ex-parte assessment at income of Rs.49,64,240/- under section 144/147 of the Act. Aggrieved, the appellant/assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A), who dismissed

Shri Shaileshbhai Somabhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are 3

ITA 178/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: The Ld.Cit(A) Are Not Filed Along With The Appeal Memo Before The Tribunal. This Defect Memo Was Communicated To The Assessee, But The Assessee Has Not Taken Any Step To Rectify The Above Defects By Filing The Affidavit Explaining The Delay In Filing The Above Appeals. Today Is The 31St Hearing Of The Above Appeals, In- Spite Of Service Of Hearing Notices, The Assessee Remains Absent. It Is Further Noted That Assessee Has Not Authorized Any Representative To Appear On His Behalf Before This Tribunal. All These Clearly Shows That Assessee Is Not Serious In Pursuing These Appeals. Thus, The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Not Maintainable & The Same Is Hereby Dismissed In Limine.

Section 144

Assessee as against separate appellate orders both dated 28.01.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad arising out of the ex-parte assessment orders passed under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years

Shri Shaileshbhai Somabhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are 3

ITA 177/AHD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: The Ld.Cit(A) Are Not Filed Along With The Appeal Memo Before The Tribunal. This Defect Memo Was Communicated To The Assessee, But The Assessee Has Not Taken Any Step To Rectify The Above Defects By Filing The Affidavit Explaining The Delay In Filing The Above Appeals. Today Is The 31St Hearing Of The Above Appeals, In- Spite Of Service Of Hearing Notices, The Assessee Remains Absent. It Is Further Noted That Assessee Has Not Authorized Any Representative To Appear On His Behalf Before This Tribunal. All These Clearly Shows That Assessee Is Not Serious In Pursuing These Appeals. Thus, The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Not Maintainable & The Same Is Hereby Dismissed In Limine.

Section 144

Assessee as against separate appellate orders both dated 28.01.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad arising out of the ex-parte assessment orders passed under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 271/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

would show that the non-speaking document is not corroborated. The AO has completely missed the fundamental concept pertaining to assessment by passing ex-parte assessment order. 9.14 Further, ld. AO considered seized material A/AKK/1, A/AKK/2 to consider the unaccounted income from Royal projects for these three assessment years

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 270/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

would show that the non-speaking document is not corroborated. The AO has completely missed the fundamental concept pertaining to assessment by passing ex-parte assessment order. 9.14 Further, ld. AO considered seized material A/AKK/1, A/AKK/2 to consider the unaccounted income from Royal projects for these three assessment years

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 269/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

would show that the non-speaking document is not corroborated. The AO has completely missed the fundamental concept pertaining to assessment by passing ex-parte assessment order. 9.14 Further, ld. AO considered seized material A/AKK/1, A/AKK/2 to consider the unaccounted income from Royal projects for these three assessment years

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 268/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

would show that the non-speaking document is not corroborated. The AO has completely missed the fundamental concept pertaining to assessment by passing ex-parte assessment order. 9.14 Further, ld. AO considered seized material A/AKK/1, A/AKK/2 to consider the unaccounted income from Royal projects for these three assessment years

Marathi Narayana Sathisha, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Bengaluru

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

ITA 709/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri. Marathi Narayana Sathisha, Vs. Ito, No.98, 1St Cross, Near White Park Ward – 3(3)(5), Apartments, Kudulu Village, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 068. Pan : Bjsps 3665 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Monish Sowkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel For Department. Date Of Hearing : 21.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.06.2024 O R D E R Per Soundararajan K: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’) Dated 29.11.2023, In Respect Of Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Working As A Physical Instructor In The Cambridge Public School At Bangalore. During The Demonetization Period, The Ao Found That The Assessee Had Deposited Cash Into His Bank Accounts Amounting To Rs.22,53,400/- & Therefore Issued Notices Under Section 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act For Which The Assessee Had Failed To File Reply. Thereafter, A Show Cause Notice Was Also Issued To The Assessee For Which Also Assessee Page 2 Of 5

For Appellant: Shri. Monish Sowkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

also an ex-parte order and therefore there is no effective opportunity available to the assessee to demonstrate his case that the ex-parte assessment order is not correct. The Paper Book now filed by the learned AR would support the case of the assessee that the school had authorized

Avnish Kumar Suraj Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-36(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 1238/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Avnish Kumar Suraj Kumar Jain, Vs Ito, C-6/1., Rana Pratap Bagh, Ward-36(5), New Delhi-110007. New Delhi. Pan-Aekpj2063C Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28.06.2024

Section 144Section 148Section 44A

Ld.CIT(A), New Delhi dated 27.11.2019 for the assessment year 2011-12. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. “That the ex-parte assessment order dated 27-11-2019 passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeal), New Delhi is against the law and facts of the case. 2. That ... Appeal), New Delhi against the order of the Ld. ITO, Ward No. 36(5), New Delhi. The Ld. ITO has framed the ex-parte assessment order u/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 due to non-appearance on the part of the appellant. In this connection it is submitted

Paragkumar Dipakkumar Khamar, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-4, Mehsana

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

ITA 232/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144

were issued to the assessee by the Assessing Officer , but there was no compliance by the assessee. The Assessing Officer proceeded to frame ex-parte assessment u/s. 144 by making addition of Rs. 13,13,329/- on account of unexplained investment. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called

Prateek Dev, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 972/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Prateek Dev, Vs Ito, Iii-A, 281, Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad-201010. Pan-Asmpd4867E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Raghuraj Singh, Advocate Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2024

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

behalf of the assessee. Thereafter, after giving statutory notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Act to the assessee, the AO passed an ex-parte assessment order and assessed the income of the assessee at INR 44,47,000/-. 4. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT

Buccs Ltd. and Nbc and Jv, Buldhana vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 67/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalkFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 32(1)(ii)

ongoing The Ld. AO and Ld. CIT both lockdown in the state of the Appellant disregarded the genuine reason for not passed the ex-parte assessment filing the submissions by the Appellant. order and the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the same which

Pradeepshetty, Tirupur vs. ITO, Ward-2, Tirupur

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

ITA 674/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.674/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 144Section 147Section 69ASection 69C

filed return of income for A.Y 2017-18. The A.O has reopened the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act and passed ex-parte assessment u/s. 144 of the Act as the assessee has not complied with the notices issued on 15.11.2021, 14.12.2021 & 27.12.2021. The A.O has made the following additions

Victory Construction Company, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 350/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13 Victory Construction Company, Income Tax Officer, 7, Amrapali Apartments, Ward-1(3)(5), Nr. Usmanpura Railway Vs Ahmedabad Crossing, Usmanpura, Ahmedabad-380014 [Pan No.:Aahfv8333J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Manish J. Shah, A.R. Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 12.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.06.2024

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 234Section 68

assessee as against the ex-parte order dated 15.01.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Center (in short “NFAC”), Delhi arising out of the ex-parte assessment order passed under Section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “the Act”) relating to the Assessment ... Assessing Officer has taken this figure exactly double namely Rs. 88,82,028/- which is a factual error and the assessment being ex-parte assessment, the assessee be given one more opportunity to explain its case with the addition evidences filed now before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. Senior D.R. appearing

Amish Umesh Jani, Thane, Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2)(5), Ahmedabad, Gujarat

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

ITA 864/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271

house/flat at Ahmedabad was lying closed and hence the assessee did not receive the notices issued by the Assessing Officer , and the ex-parte assessment order was framed by the Assessing Officer. It was submitted that assessee has also now passed away on 19.04.2021(death certificate enclosed at PB/Page ... responded to these notices . The AO issued SCN but the same also remained un-complied with by the assessee. Finally, an ex-parte assessment order dated 16th October, 2017 was issued u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act wherein two additions were made by the AO, firstly with respect

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panvel vs. Shri. Prakash Devidas Patil, Pen

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

ITA 154/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.154/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ito, Ward-4, Panvel. Vs. Shri Prakash Devidas Patil, At Vadav Tal Pen Dist. Raigad, Pen- 402107. Pan : Asnpp9067B Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak Assessee By None : Date Of Hearing 11.06.2024 : Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.11.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “I. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee Merely On The Basis Of Written Submission Without Any Documentary Evidence.

For Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 69A

Rs.91,29,530/- of which Rs.57,10,000/- was added u/s 69A of the IT Act. 5. Being aggrieved with the above ex-parte assessment order, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, who vide impugned order allowed the appeal of the assessee on the basis

Pushpendra Singh Chouhan, Sehore vs. ITO-Sehore, Sehore

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

ITA 122/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Pushpendra Singh Ito Chouhan, Sehore C/O Adv.Hitesh Chimnani, Ug-37 Trade Centre, Vs. 18 South Tukoganj, Near Hotel Crown Palace, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cggps1953Q Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Ms. Komal Wadhwani & Komal Kataria, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2024 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

practitioner Mr Bhojraj Sharma who also did not serve and help in the assessee's assessment case. It was only when the ex-parte assessment order was received by him, wherein addition of Rs. 36,03,600/- on account of entire cash deposited in his bank account was made

Jasudben Navinchandra Modi, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(2) Present Jurisdiction the ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 395/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad20 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Ahmedabad Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 05.04.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69

except to complete the assessment ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act. Therefore, in absence of any explanation/documentary evidences, the AO passed an ex-parte assessment order. 5.2 The appellant in grounds of appeal contested that she has not received any notice which was served on address i.e. Jasudaben Navinchandra