“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

Aastha Minimet India Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 731/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari (Accountant Member), Shri Soundararajan K. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 14ASection 250

show cause notice. Challenging the said order of the AO the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and contended that the ex-parte assessment order is bad in law since no proper opportunity has been granted to the assessee. The learned CIT(A) sent notices of hearing through

Rakesh Vyas, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 295/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Meena, (Addl. CIT)

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

Accountant, who was handling the income tax matters and was receiving notices on his mail, did not inform the assessee, which resulted in ex-parte assessment under section 144. The Learned Assessing Officer resorted to provisions of Sec. 145(3) and applied GP rate of 3% on estimate basis, which

Venkataramanappa Suma, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikaballapur

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

ITA 774/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Matta Padma, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 249Section 249(3)

condonation of the delay in filing the appeal and thus, we hold so. 8.2 Before parting, we also note that it is the ex-parte assessment framed by the AO on account of non-cooperation from the side of the assessee. But undisputedly, the assessment was framed dated 19/04/2021, which

Hasmukhbhai Hansraj Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(7), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1377/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2015-16 Hasmukhbhai Hansraj Patel Vs. The Ito, Ward-3(3)(7) C-202, Suvas Residency Ahmedabad. Opp: Maghmalhar Society Nikol Road Ahmedabad 382350. Pan : Bpdpp 1078 Q

For Appellant: Shri Seem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 69A

shifted his residence two years ago, hence was unable to receive the notices issued in Assessment Proceedings which has resulted into ex-parte assessment. The assessee requested that contention raised herein should be accepted and additional evidence may be admitted. On the basis of additional evidence submitted by the assessee

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1412/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

appeal(s) on 18.03.2023 against the assessment(s) order dated 16.03.2022. He fails to rebut the fact that the Assessing Officer had framed ex-parte assessment(s) herein which could not be taken to the logical conclusion on account of the management issues in assessee’s governing body. Be that

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1411/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1410/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1409/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1408/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1407/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1406/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

Gourishankar Education Society, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1405/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 1Section 250(6)

Premji Bhuralal Gala, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 24(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA 440/Mum/2024, ITA

ITA 440/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt (SRDR)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 269SSection 271(1)(c)

aside the Notice u/s 148 dated 28.03.2019, Ex. "B" herein, the order disposing objections dated 05.11.2019, Ex. "H" herein and the ex-parte assessment order dated 04.12.2019 Ex. "I" herein passed by the Respondent: 5. Mr. Waive states that respondent should be permitted to take action under Section 271D

Paresh Valji Choudhary, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 1045/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, (SR.DR)

Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Accuscan Daignostic Service Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Pune

ITA 526/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.526/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Accuscan Daignostic Service V The Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, S Ward-1(1), Pune. 304, Rajat Apartmens, North Main Road, Lane-06, Koregaon Park, Pune – 411001. Pan: Aabca4647D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 10/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2024 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], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 19.01.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. That, On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Of Cit(A), Nfac Dated 19.01.2024 In Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Appellant Is Arbitrary, Erroneous, Contrary To Law & Is Opposed To The Principles Of Natural Justice, Equity & Fair Play. 2. That, On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Accuscan Daignostic Service Pvt. Ltd., [A]

Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

failed to consider that the assessee was prevented with reasonable cause from furnishing the Income Tax return, therefore the ex-parte assessment is illegal and bad in law. 5. That, on facts and circumstances of the case, The Ld CIT (A) has erred in confirming the addition

Abbasbhai Sajaudinbhai Barad, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1012/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 151Section 68Section 69A

alert was received on the mobile of the Accountant and, therefore, the assessee could not comply with the notices resulting the same into ex-parte assessment under Section 144 of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer did not follow the procedure of service of notice through

Mohamed Imran Mohamed Siddique Khan, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 26(2)(3), Mumbai

The appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2900/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(C)Section 271F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL

Rupmata Zilla Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Ltd., Osmanabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Latur

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

ITA 256/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.256/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Rupmata Zilla Nagari Sahakari Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Latur. Pathsanstha Ltd., Samarth Nagar, Osmanabad, Osmanabad- 413501. Pan : Aajfr0354D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pratik Sandbhor Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 27.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.12.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. C1T(A) Erred In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing Of Appeal In As Much As The Appellant Received The Impugned Order Dated 29/03/2022 Only On 23/08/2022. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Assessing Officer Erred In Assessing The Total Income At Rs.3,79,38,930/-

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

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

this Rs.3,77,14,712/- was added u/s 69A of the IT Act. 4. Being aggrieved with the above ex-parte assessment order, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since there was delay of 139 days in filing first appeal, ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, vide order ... assessee, the Chartered Accountant of the bank was informed to take appropriate action. The Chartered Accountant advised to file first appeal against the ex-parte assessment order on the basis of which penalty u/s 27(1)(c) was initiated. Therefore, the first appeal was filed on 14.09.2022. The counsel

Ramesh Singh, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1071/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ramesh Singh Vs. Ito L/H Of Late Shri Pitam Ward-2 (1) Singh C/O Shri Sandeep Ghaziabad Sapra, Advocate, C-763, New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan No.Gmgps9615M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Sh. Somil Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By Sh. P.N. Baranwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/06/2024

Section 133Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 250

late Peetam Singh had sold agricultural land worth Rs.15 crores. The assessment was opened under Section 147 and as no return was filed ex-parte assessment under Section 144 of the Act was passed by making a long term capital gain addition of Rs.14,76,43,005/- which is sustained

Srilakshmi Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 73/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

parte by the Assessing Officer when the assessee failed to turn up on various dates/opportunities granted during the assessment proceedings and finally the ex-parte assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Act vide order dated 26.03.2015. The ld. Counsel further submitted that before