#ex parte assessment

ITAT Surat condoned a 578-day delay in appeal filing, holding that an assessee's residence abroad constitutes 'sufficient cause' for non-compliance with tax notices. The Tribunal deleted the penalty under Section 271(1)(b) and remanded the ex-parte assessment of NRE account credits, reinforcing leniency for NRIs in tax proceedings.

The ITAT Kolkata has set aside an ex parte income tax assessment under Sections 69A and 69C, holding that the right to fair hearing is non-negotiable under natural justice-even when delay in filing an appeal is contested. This ruling reinforces that suspicion alone cannot substitute evidence, and reassessment must be conducted afresh with full opportunity to the assessee.

The ITAT Mumbai has ruled that an ex parte order under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act cannot stand if the assessee later produces credible documentary proof-such as gift deeds or FD maturity receipts-that explains the so-called unexplained investment. This mandates the Assessing Officer to grant a fair hearing and re-adjudicate, reinforcing natural justice as non-negotiable in tax assessments.

The Madras High Court has ruled that an ex parte GST assessment under Section 62 is void if the assessee never received notice because their registration was cancelled without proper service. This upholds natural justice by requiring actual notice, not just procedural compliance, and mandates release of attached bank accounts pending fresh adjudication with a fair hearing.

ITAT Delhi sets aside an ex-parte assessment order under Sections 148A and 144 of the Income Tax Act, ruling that non-receipt of the order by the assessee constitutes reasonable cause for delay in filing an appeal. The Tribunal directed a fresh assessment with a fair hearing opportunity, reinforcing natural justice principles in tax proceedings.

ITAT Delhi ruled that ex-parte assessment orders under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act violate natural justice principles, requiring a fresh hearing. The tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee a fair opportunity to present their case, setting a precedent for procedural fairness in tax appeals.

ITAT Delhi quashes reassessment under Section 147/144 of the Income Tax Act for failure to serve notice at the assessee's correct address, reinforcing that procedural compliance is mandatory for jurisdiction. The ruling underscores that ex-parte orders without proper notice violate principles of natural justice and are void ab initio.

Karnataka High Court quashed an ex-parte income tax assessment order under Section 148 IT Act, ruling that written submissions by the assessee constitute participation and mandate a final opportunity to file returns before final adjudication. The judgment reinforces that natural justice principles apply even in faceless assessment proceedings, protecting taxpayers from procedural unfairness.

ITAT Ahmedabad ruled that an assessee's non-participation in assessment proceedings does not forfeit the right to a fresh hearing, upholding natural justice principles. However, the Tribunal imposed costs for the assessee's procedural lapse, balancing fairness with accountability. The decision reinforces that ex-parte assessments under Section 144 IT Act can be set aside if the assessee's default was not willful or contumacious.

ITAT Ahmedabad rules that an ex parte assessment under Section 69A of the IT Act cannot bar reassessment if the taxpayer provides credible evidence on appeal. The tribunal mandated a fresh hearing, reinforcing natural justice principles in tax proceedings and setting a precedent for taxpayers contesting unexplained income additions.

Karnataka High Court ruled that a co-operative society's failure to respond to a show-cause notice does not automatically negate its statutory deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, if a bona fide lapse is demonstrated and prior similar income was accepted. The ruling reinforces that procedural non-compliance alone cannot override substantive tax benefits for eligible entities.

ITAT Mumbai holds that deduction under Section 57(iii) cannot be denied solely due to ex parte assessment if nexus between interest paid and earned is proven through documentary evidence.