Income Tax: High Court Quashes Rs. 232 Crore Ex Parte Assessment; Grants Fresh Opportunity to Respond:

Income Tax: High Court Quashes Rs. 232 Crore Ex Parte Assessment; Grants Fresh Opportunity to Respond

Income Tax Assessment set aside due to insolvency-related inability to represent case; remedy of appeal held illusory in facts

HC sets aside Rs. 232 crore ex parte assessment passed during insolvency; directs fresh hearing

authorMeetu KumaridateFeb 21, 2026
Last update on Feb 21, 2026
Income Tax: High Court Quashes Rs. 232 Crore Ex Parte Assessment; Grants Fresh Opportunity to Respond Nayati Healthcare and Research NCR Private Limited challenged an ex parte assessment order dated 24.03.2025 passed under Sections 143(3) read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, whereby income was determined at Rs. 232,17,82,426 on a best judgment basis. The company had been admitted into insolvency by order of the National Company Law Tribunal, which appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) under Section 16 of the IBC. On 05.08.2024, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal stayed the CIRP timeline, effectively stalling proceedings though the IRP continued formally. The company exited insolvency on 07.01.2026. It was contended that during this period neither the IRP nor the management could properly represent the case, resulting in ex parte assessment.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
Main Issue: Whether a best judgment assessment passed during pendency of insolvency proceedings, when the assessee was allegedly unable to present its case effectively, could be sustained or whether principles of natural justice required fresh adjudication. HC's Ruling: The High Court held that the peculiar circumstances showed that both the IRP and the management were bona fide prevented from placing relevant material before the Assessing Officer.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
The Court further observed that relegating the petitioner to the appellate remedy would be illusory in the facts, since the appellate authority may decline to admit fresh material and the statutory pre-deposit requirement would impose undue hardship on a company that had just emerged from insolvency. The Court set aside the assessment order. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh detailed notice, grant at least 30 days to respond, and pass a fresh order in accordance with law after considering the company’s submissions. The Court clarified that no opinion was expressed on the merits. The writ petition was accordingly allowed. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

LinkedIn

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2182
Up Next

Loading suggestions…