← 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

Mr. Ramesh Prabhakar Patil, Solapur vs. ITO Ward 2, Pandharpur

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

ITA 906/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist (Through Virtual)
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

kindly be allowed to be altered, modified, amended, deleted etc in the interest of natural justice.” 4. It is a case of an ex-parte assessment under section 144 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that

Savita Kamlakar Birajdar, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Latur

ITA 2190/PUN/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A VazeFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist (Through Virtual)
Section 144Section 147Section 69

appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or withdraw any ground at the time of hearing.” 4. It is a case of an ex-parte assessment under section 144 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that

Babugari Kareem Basha, Kurnool vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nandyal

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are dismissed mutatis mutandis for both the A

ITA 1449/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 249(3)Section 69A

does not come under “sufficient cause” for condonation of delay. Further, the appellant is non-serious about proceedings, which is evident from the ex-parte assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s 147 r.w.s.144 of the Act dated 31.03.2022, where the A.O. has passed the assessment order in the absence

Babugari Kareem Basha, Kurnool vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nandyal

ITA 1448/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 147Section 249(3)Section 69A

does not come under "sufficient cause” for condonation of delay. Further, the appellant is non-serious about proceedings, which is evident from the ex-parte assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s 147 r.w.s.144 of the Act dated 31.03.2022, where the A.O. has passed the assessment order in the absence

Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana vs. Goyum Screw Press, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 606/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 606/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year. : 2017-18 The Ito, Vs Goyum Screw Press, Ludhiana. 324/2, Industrial Area-A, Opposite Berger Paints, Millerganj, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaffg9228H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Honey Bajaj, Advocate. Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 O R D E R Hybrid Hearing Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Honey Bajaj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 251(1)(a)

With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out that AO has passed an ex-parte assessment order u/s 144 read with Section 147 of the A.Y. 2017-18 2 Income Tax Act, 1961. On appeal, ld.CIT (Appeals), by exercising his powers

Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana vs. K P Exim Inc, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 605/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 605/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year. : 2014-15 The Ito, Vs K.P. Exim Inc. Ludhiana. Main Bahadur Ke Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aakfk2926M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : None. Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 O R D E R Physical Hearing Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

merits of the case. A.Y. 2014-15 2 3. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. The ex-parte assessment order u/s 144 read with Section 147 of the Act was passed in the case of the assessee whereby an addition of Rs.3 ... vide order dated 21.09.2022. Before ld. CIT (Appeals) it was pointed out that ld.CIT (Appeals), NFAC has set aside this ex-parte assessment order vide its order dated 15.01.2025, meaning thereby, the very genesis to impose the penalty upon the assessee has been extinguished. Accordingly, ld.CIT (Appeals) has deleted

Income Tax Officer, Nahan vs. Raj Kumar, Nahan

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 447/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 447/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year. : 2017-18 The Ito, Shri Raj Kumar, Nahan. Vs Near Delhi Gate,Opp. Gurudwara, Nahan, Distt. Sirmour (Hp). "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bospk7875L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 O R D E R Physical Hearing Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 147Section 69A

Bharti Airtel. But, instead of conducting judicious enquiry which ought to have been conducted by him, he ignored all principles of framing an ex-parte assessment order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act and simply made the addition. The AO was not only acting as a prosecutor

Bhagyeshree Chandrashekar Sakle, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-9(3), Pune

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

ITA 2337/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2337/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2020-21 Bhagyeshree Chandrashekar V The Income Tax Officer, Sakle, S Ward-9(3), Pune. Shop No.511, Cantonment Complex, Dehuroad, Ral Haveli, Pune – 412101. Pan: Cqyps6464G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte Revenue By Smt Neha Thakur (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 12.09.2025 For A.Y.2020-21 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Dated 17.01.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

consideration.” 6. We have also perused the order of ld.CIT(A) for A.Y.2019-20 wherein, on identical facts ld.CIT(A) has set-aside the ex-parte assessment order for denovo adjudication. 7. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set-aside the order u/s.144 r.w.s 147 dated17.01.2025 for A.Y.2020-21

Mani Sridhar, Chennai vs. CIT (A), Chennai

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

ITA 3292/CHNY/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Manu Kumar Giri

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

income for the year under consideration and also could not respond to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer, resulting in an ex-parte assessment. The learned counsel pleaded that the delay may be condoned and the matter be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh

Priti Bhansali, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward 1, Bharuch

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the penalty levied is deleted

ITA 1023/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Surat23 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamblepriti Bhansali, Income Tax Officer, Vs. D 1, Rajashree Nagar, Ward-1, Umalla, Bharuch. Bharuch-39310. [Pan : Agspb2559 H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, Ar Respondent By: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23.01.2026 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 273B

Department. Although statutory notices, including notice under section 148, were issued, the same were not communicated to the assessee. Consequently, an ex-parte assessment order was passed. The appeal against the said order was filed with delay, which was condoned by the appellate authority, and the ex-parte assessment order

Vaijnath Gundappa Kshirsagar Through L/H. Shri Shivkumar Sadramappa Kshirsagar, Latur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Latur

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

ITA 2835/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JhaFor Respondent: Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar
Section 144Section 148Section 154Section 54B

time to time. However, the assessee failed to comply with any of the notices including the show cause notice which resulted in an ex-parte assessment completed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 26.12.2018 by the Ld. AO thereby making an addition of Rs.26,10,000/-on account

Zyka Merchandise Private Limited, Indore vs. DCIT Central Circle -2, Bhopal

ITA 561/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

Badri Singh Sisodiya, Indore vs. PCIT, Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 395/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 147Section 263

have heard learned Representatives of both sides and perused the impugned orders carefully. 5. In these three (3) matters, the ex-parte assessments were framed by AO u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Act. Subsequently, Ld. PCIT examined the records of assessment-proceeding and viewed that the assessment- orders

Badri Singh Sisodiya, Indore vs. PCIT, Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 394/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 147Section 263

have heard learned Representatives of both sides and perused the impugned orders carefully. 5. In these three (3) matters, the ex-parte assessments were framed by AO u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Act. Subsequently, Ld. PCIT examined the records of assessment-proceeding and viewed that the assessment- orders

Badri Singh Sisodiya, Indore vs. PCIT, Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 393/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Had Already Been Filed & Pending On The Same Issue. The Appellant Prays That The Said Order Being Bad In Law Be Directed To Be Set Aside.

Section 147Section 263

hearing." 4. We have heard learned Representatives of both sides and perused the impugned orders carefully. 5. In these three (3) matters, the ex-parte assessments were framed by AO u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Act. Subsequently, Ld. PCIT examined the records of assessment-proceeding and viewed that

Mr Dhananjay Mahadeo Sonsurkar, Mumbai vs. ITO/CIT (A), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6044/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Mr. Prashant Ghumare,(virtually present)For Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, (CIT DR)
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 272A(1)(d)Section 273B

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITO 19 1 1, Mumbai vs. Chogaram Hiramji Devasai, Mumbai

ITA 6987/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Paranjpe, ARFor Respondent: Revenue by
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

profit ratio, mode of payment, tax audit report, and balance sheet. Despite the appellant furnishing these documents, the AO proceeded to pass an ex-parte assessment order under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act, without affording the appellant reasonable opportunity of being heard. The AO estimated

M/S Morpheus Developers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 17(2), Delhi

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

ITA 5428/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs M/S Morpheus Developers Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt.Ltd. Income Tax Circle- 17(2) 1, Main Road Maujpur Delhi- Delhi 110053 Pan No. Aaicm1972A (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 68

also submitted the Ld. NFAC should have condoned the delay and matter sent to the Assessing Officer because the Assessing Officer passed the ex-parte assessment order against the assessee. 7. Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue relied upon the orders of the below authorities. She submitted that the appeal ... NFAC should have condoned the delay and should have decided the appeal on merit, because in this appeal the Assessing Officer passed the ex-parte assessment order. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to restore the matter back to the file to the Assessing

Amarsinh Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2143/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

mail id registered thereon. As a result, no compliance could be made by the assessee before the AO, which had resulted in ex-parte assessment order. The assessee came to know about the order of the AO only when the recovery of the demand was pursued. Thereafter, the assessee consulted

Rakesh Kumar, Barabanki vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(5), Barabanki

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 438/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Rakesh Kumar V. The Income Tax Officer Naka Paisar Ward 5(5) Deen Dayal Nagar Barabanki Barabanki (U.P) Tan/Pan:Awkpk2247F (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 27.12.2023, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. The Income Tax Department Was In Possession Of Information That The Assessee Had Deposited Rs.11,40,000/- During The Demonetization Period, I.E., From 09.11.2016 To 30.12.2016 In His Bank Account No.752530110000014 Maintained With Bank Of India, Subeha Bazar, Haidergarh. Thereafter, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Issued Statutory Notices To The Assessee, Requiring The Assessee To Explain The Source Of Cash Deposits In His Bank Account. Since There Was No Compliance From The Side Of The

For Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 144Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 68

assessee, the AO issued show cause notice under section 144 of the Act to the assessee proposing to pass an ex-parte assessment order. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee furnished reply, stating therein that the assessee was a trader of manure, seeds, medicines and pesticides during