“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

Shri Aijaz Rahi S/O Shri Mohd Ismail Wani, Banglore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -3 (1), Srinagar

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

ITA 237/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Prashant Singh, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 246ASection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251

order of the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 2 Aijaz Rahi v. ITO 20.09.2022 arising out of an ex-parte assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in respect of Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The ld. counsel has filed an adjournment application dated

Shri Abdul Hamid Malik, Anantnag vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Srinagar

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

ITA 236/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Prashant Singh, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 246ASection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251

assessee against the ex- parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 30.07.2022 arising out of an ex-parte assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer in respect of Assessment Year 2017-18. 2 Abdul Hamid Malik v. DCIT 2. The ld. counsel

ITO, Udaipur vs. Shri Suresh Kumar Khatik, Udaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 169/JODH/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

Section 144Section 147

issued on 26/2/2013 and served through registered AD. On account of non compliance of the above said notices the Ld. AO has passed ex-parte assessment treating the whole deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee on different dates as income of the assessee totaling the same

ITO, Udaipur vs. Shri Suresh Kumar Khatik, Udaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 168/JODH/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur13 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

Section 144Section 147

Alliance Steel, Kollam vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is allowed

ITA 194/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri N.S.Rajagopal, CAFor Respondent: Sri Prasanth V.K, CIT-DR

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 263

grossly erred in presuming that the turnover declared by the appellant is over and above the turnover estimated by the AO in the ex-parte assessment order u/s. 144 of the I.T.Act. The CIT failed to note that the turnover declared by the appellant has been ignored

Vinita Chaudhary, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward -4(5), Gurgaon

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 418/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147

facts and circumstances of the case, National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in law and on facts in confirming to passing an ex-parte assessment order u/s 144/147 and that too without giving show cause notices as per law and without giving adequate opportunity to the assessee. 2. That having

Shri Gurbachan Singh S/O Shri.Gurdev Singh, Mansa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 1 (4 ), Mansa

In the result, the quantum appeal in ITA No

ITA 198/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

view, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have issued show cause notice and taken the appellant rebuttal on record as it was an ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO without controverting the issue to the assesse. Since, an ex- parte assessment order is being confirmed

Shri Gurbachan Singh S/O Sh. Gurdev Singh, Mansa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward - 1 (4), Mansa

In the result, the quantum appeal in ITA No

ITA 197/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

Raghunath Jew School of Management Studies, Balasore vs. ITO (Exemption), Cuttack

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 177/CTK/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita Nos.174-177/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2009-2010 To 2012-2013) M/S Raghunath Jew School Of Vs Ito (Exemption), Cuttack Management Studies, At: Tigiria, Punjibag, Sunhat (Chandipur Road) Balasore-756002 Pan No. :Aabtr 2600 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri B.Panda, Senior Advocate With Shri B.R.Panda, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr & Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, All Dated 30.09.2022, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1046137372(1), Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1046137753(1), Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1046138161(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1046137557 (1) For The Assessment Years 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012 & 2012-2013, Respectively. 2. Shri Basudev Panda, Senior Advocate With Shri B.R.Panda, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit- Dr With Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri B.Panda, Senior Advocate with Shri B.R.Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR

Nos.174-177/CTK/2022 appeals to the file of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC would also be of no help insofar as the assessments are ex-parte assessments and all details had not been produced before the AO. It was the prayer that the issues in the appeals may be restored

Raghunath Jew School of Management Studies, Balasore vs. ITO (Exemption), Cuttack

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 176/CTK/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri B.Panda, Senior Advocate with Shri B.R.Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR

Raghunath Jew School of Management Studies, Balasore vs. ITO (Exemption), Cuttack

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 175/CTK/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri B.Panda, Senior Advocate with Shri B.R.Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S C.P.& Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6852/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs. M/S. C.P. & Associates Pvt. Ltd., Circle-5(1), Gokul Bhawan, 2Nd Floor, New Delhi Lane No.4, Western Marg, Saidulajab New Delhi-1100 30 Pan :Aabcc6596R (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross-Objection No.142/Del/2016 (In Ita No. 6852/Del/2015) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. C.P. & Associates Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Gokul Bhawan, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Circle-5(1), Lane No.4, Western Marg, New Delhi Saidulajab New Delhi-1100 30 Pan :Aabcc6596R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 1Section 143Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 17Section 43BSection 68

Disallowance under section 43B of the Act 76,72,171 5. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the ex-parte assessment on ground of notices not validly served and the additions /disallowances made by the Ld. AO. The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s contention

Mukul Jain, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Meerut

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

ITA 580/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Satish Aggarwal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 68

issue notice of demand is also missing in the order. 2. That proper opportunity of hearing was not given to us hence ex-parte assessment order deserve to be quashed. 2 Mukul Jain 3. That agriculture income of Rs. 17,67,400.00 has to be allowed as the same

Shri Avijit Shastri, Indor vs. The ITO 4(1), Indore

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

ITA 197/IND/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 24Section 80C

assessee approached the department for details of old demand. The assessee then informed by the ITO-4(1), Indore that there was an ex-parte assessment for A.Y. 2009-10 with demand of Rs. 2,64,730/-. The counsel of the assessee made a written request

ACIT, Central Circle - 2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Magnetic Niryat Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 347/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 347/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,......Appellant Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 4Th Floor, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- M/S. Magnetic Niryat Pvt. Limited,............Respondent 9, Vivekanand Road, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aagcm4047E] Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 68

appeal. However, its grievances revolve around a single issue, namely whether gross purchases of the assessee are to be added in an ex-parte assessment on an estimate basis or element of income quantified by the ld. CIT(Appeals) at 5% is to be restricted. 3. Brief facts ... Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/s. Magnetic Niryat Pvt. Limited total income of Rs.59,652/-. The ld. Assessing Officer has passed a very brief ex-parte assessment, whereby he has added a sum of Rs.30,02,54,353/-. The finding recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer reads as under:- “2.4. Creditors

Vertex Spinning Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 256/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariyaFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144

Ground No. 1 raised by the Assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of Assessing Officer in passing ex-parte Assessment Order under Section 144 of the Act. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Perusal of grounds of appeal

Singal Pipe Fittings Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 13(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1762/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT D/R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

money amounting to Rs.3,96,34,604/-. The assessee did not reply to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer and accordingly an ex-parte assessment order was passed where addition of this amount has been made with the help of Section 68 of the Act. 4. Dissatisfied with this

Ranisati Capital Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-1(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1529/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, D/R

Section 143(2)Section 250

directed the assessee to submit the details of the applicant and their creditworthiness but nothing was submitted by the assessee and in an ex-parte assessment order passed according to the best judgment of the Assessing Officer, addition of Rs.1,41,00,000/- has been made to the total income

Nsk Builders, Trichy vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Trichy

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 47/CHNY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144

allowed by AO at 15%. Even, it is noticed that the assessee failed to appear despite many opportunities and in absence of assessee, ex-parte assessment was framed by AO by allowing depreciation @ 15% instead of 30% claimed by assessee. We noted that neither

Nsk Builders, Trichy vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Trichy

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 46/CHNY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 144