“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

Narayan, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Narayan Vs. Ito House No.431/9, Balaji Ward- 3 (1) Hanuman Mandir, Sector- Gurgaon 11, Shivaji Nagar, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122001 Pan No.Aqppn9087M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Yogesh Yadav, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Anshul, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 Order Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm:

Section 147Section 148Section 2

notice to the assessee under Section 148 of the Act. The assessee did not appear before the AO and AO has passed the ex-parte assessment order vide dated 10.11.2016 and taxable income was assessed at Rs.1,55,85,250 against which the assessee has filed the appeal before

Bhuramal Tanted, Sailana, Ratlam vs. Income Tax Officer -2, Ratlam

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 559/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 144Section 250

considering the documentary evidences (additional e3vidences) furnished by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC against the appeal filed against Ex-parte Assessment order dated 05.11.2019 and not doing so is wrong and contrary to the provisions of the Act. Thus, the order u/s 250 of the Act dated

Kasthuri, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corprate Ward-10(2), Chennai

The appeal is dismissed on merits by the Ld

ITA 625/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.625/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Kasthuri Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.5-A, Station Road, Non Corporate Ward 10(2) Villivakkam 600 049. Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Dhgpk 9969E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Girish Kumar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. S. Easwar, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri () This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order No.Itba/Nfac/S 250/2023-24/1058933600 1) Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)(Nfac) Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 20.12.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessment Was Framed By The The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(2) , Chennai Vide Order Dated 26.09.2019. 2. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 22 Days In Filing The Appeal. Considering The Period Of Delay We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri. S. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. S. Easwar, IRS, JCIT

Section 144Section 69A

which assessee is in further appeal before us. 5. Though we appreciate the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the ex-parte assessment order u/s 144 of the Act and the principles of natural justice we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing

Palaniappan Ravi, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-2, Thiruvhengode

In the result, the appeal stands allowed for a statistical purposes

ITA 603/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.603/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Palaniappan Ravi, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.888, N.C. Colony, Ward 2, Elanthakuttai (Po) Tiruchengode Veppadai, Namakkal 638 008 [Pan: Amcpr 6276M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. I. Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. S. Easwar, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. I. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. S. Easwar, IRS, JCIT

Section 144Section 69A

which assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. Though we appreciate the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the ex-parte assessment order u/s 144 of the Act and the principles of natural justice we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing

Thulasingam Sambath, Tindivanam vs. ITO, Ward 2, Villupuram

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 602/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.602/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Thulasingam Sambath Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 28, Perumal Kovil Street, Ward 2, Tindivanam 604 001. Villupuram. [Pan: Dyrps 5704K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. Nidhi D. Jain, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. S. Easwar, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Ms. Nidhi D. Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. S. Easwar, IRS, JCIT

Section 144Section 69A

which assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. Though we appreciate the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the ex-parte assessment order u/s 144 of the Act and the principles of natural justice we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing

Arjun Ratna Thapaniya, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department

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

ITA 4854/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhariassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Vishwasrao, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 250

company’s colleagues, who did not file any reply to the notices issued by the AO, which resulted into passing the ex-parte assessment order making the additions, hence by taking lenient view, the delay in filing the first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner may be condoned. 6. We have

Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 41/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala The Income Tax Officer 122 Kutbi Mohalla 1/N Kalupur Vs Ward-1(2)(4) Darwaja Ahmedabad Kalupur Ahmedabad – 380 001 Gujarat Pan:Eqepk 9096 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Sadhwani, Ar Revenue By : Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16 /05/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthe Present Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 28.11.2023, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. 2. Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Taken By The Assessee: Sakina Ahmedali Kantavala Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Sadhwani, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

fact in not appreciating the fact that Ld. AO has not followed the due process of assessment prescribed by CBDT for framing of ex-parte assessment order u/s 144. The ex parte assessment order passed u/s 144 is not accompanied by directions u/s 144A of range head, as required

Srinivas Reddy Saddipalli, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 460/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.460/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Srinivas Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer Saddipalli Ward 4(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Conps1185P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Helen Ruby Jesindha,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/05/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Helen Ruby Jesindha,DR

Section 144Section 69Section 69A

also bank statements and claimed that these evidences were not filed before the Assessing Officer. We find the Assessing Officer has passed ex-parte assessment order in absence of necessary details. The assessee has now furnished various evidences and asked for one more opportunity before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, considering

Vimla, Ramgarh, Alwar vs. ITO, Alwar

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

ITA 300/JPR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 May 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kanodia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Rs.35,45,000/- deposited in cash to her bank account. The appellant failed to justify during the appellate proceedings as to how the ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO is bad in law and was based on wrong facts. Ground No. 2 is therefore dismissed. Ground

Sunita Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward 2(2)(3), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 3775/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Tyagi, Vs Ito, R-7/120, Raj Nagar, Ward-2(2)(3), Ghaziabad, Ghaziabad. Uttar Pradesh-201002. Pan-Aaupt3785H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sahil Sharma, Adv & Shri Sanjay Parashar, Adv. Respondent By Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28.05.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi Dated 30.11.2023 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 148Section 151

void. 5. Without prejudice, that on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. A.O. erred in passing an ex-parte assessment order, as the Appellant possessed adequate funds for the purchase of the immovable property, rendering the impugned addition of Rs.47,80,000/- as unexplained

Naveen Kumar Bitla, Warangal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 590/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.590/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Naveen Kumar Bitla Vs. Acit Warangal Circle 7(1) Pan:Atfpb0191D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Helen Ruby Jesindha, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/05/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate S SandhyaFor Respondent: : Smt. Helen Ruby Jesindha, DR

Section 69

sales during the demonetization period when compared to earlier period, in my considered view, since the first appellate authority has passed the ex-parte assessment order, the matter needs to go back to the file of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication and to consider the evidences filed

Sanjay Sharma, Indore vs. ITO-1(1), Indore

Appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 5/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Sanjay Sharma, National E-Assessment बनाम/ 41, Kelod Kartal, Centre, Assessment Unit, Vs. Khandwa Road, Income Tax Department, Indore. Nfac,Delhi (Pan: Effps8527L) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Shri Sanjay Sharma, Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 41, Kelod Kartal, 1(1), Vs. Khandwa Road, Indore. Indore. (Pan: Effps8527L) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 144Section 147Section 253(5)Section 271FSection 50C

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

Sanjay Sharma, Indore vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

Appeals are allowed for statistical

ITA 4/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 May 2024AY 2013-14

Section 144Section 147Section 253(5)Section 271FSection 50C

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

Manganga Sahakari Patsanstha Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre

ITA 1843/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Apate, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

prosecution and secondly, upholding the additions on the merits of findings of the learned Assessing Officer. Therefore, this appeal is result of ex-parte assessment order and ex-parte appellate order resulting into this demand. 3. The petitioner says that the demand outstanding

Gaurav Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 60(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 217/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2024AY 2012-13

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

para 4 of the assessment order. However, the appellant/assessee failed to ensure compliance of any of the statutory notices. Hence, the AO made ex-parte assessment treating the entire deposits aggregating to Rs. 26,21,634/- made by the appellant/assessee in his bank account in the relevant year as income

Sarafathali Mohammed Hasana Lebbai, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 20(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4825/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Kumar CIT,DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 69C

adjournment application. 3.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the ex-parte assessment order passed under section 144 of the Act without considering the submission filed on 23 March 2022. 4. Addition

Motiram Kisan Kahandal, Girnare Nashik vs. CIT Appeal, Nashik

Appeal is partly allowed in above

ITA 291/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri B D KhairnarFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta

Section 147Section 68

hence assessment demand of Rs.11,05,580/- this is a artificial demand which was 2 ITA.No.291/PUN./2024 derived by way of ex-parte assessment not giving me opportunity how cash deposited in bank of Rs.2,80,308/- and Rs.15,00,000/- cheques deposited sales of inherited land come from

Bhawana Hariram Lavhale, Amravati vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Amravati

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2013–14 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 May 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 44Section 69A

erred in determining income at Rs. 19,88,25,743/- ignoring the settled legal position of determining assessable income at real income in ex-parte assessment. 11. The action of A.O. in treating entire deposit as unexplained without considering withdrawals from same bank account ignoring concept of peak theory ... 27/03/2021. However, the assessee did not comply with the various notices issued in the course of assessment proceedings, which resulted in rendering ex-parte assessment order dated 30/03/2022, passed under section 44 of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, the addition was made of ` 19,88,25,743, under section

Bhawana Hariram Lavhale, Amravati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Amravati

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2013–14 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 169/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 May 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 44Section 69A

Chetan Balubhai Sanena, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 32(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3849/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh, Chetan Balubhai Sanena Vs. Income Tax Officer – 32(1)(2) B-405, Rainbow Apartments Bandra Kurla Complex C.S. Road, Dahisar (E) Mumbai 400051 Mumbai 400068 Pan/Gir No. :Acipp3106F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 148

that the assessee has obtained accommodation bills from four parties as per information received from the Sales Tax Department. The AO has passed ex-parte assessment order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 27.02.2015 and disallowed the entire alleged bogus purchases of Rs.28,27,051/- on the basis ... letters and made correspondence with the AO as mentioned in the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee regarding not receiving of ex-parte assessment order dated 27.02.2015 and also not receiving the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act on the basis of which the case