“faceless assessment”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144BSection 144B2,420 judgments

PRATEEK SANGHVI HUF,INDORE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed with liberty to file before ITAT, Indore

ITA 5507/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarprateek Sanghvi, Huf Assessment Unit National 21, Pragati Vihar Colony, Faceless Assessment Centre, Bicholi Mardana, Indore, Vs. Delhi. Madhaya Pradesh-452016. Pan-Aalhp0926P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain, Ca (Vc) Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.04.2026 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against Order Dated 11.07.2025 Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 14.03.2023 Of Assessment Unit [Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Ao’] Under Section 144/147 Of The Act For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Application For Transfer Of Appeal To Bench At Indore Has Been Preferred.

Section 144Section 250

DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Prateek Sanghvi, HUF Assessment Unit National 21, Pragati Vihar Colony, Faceless Assessment Centre, Bicholi Mardana, Indore, Vs. Delhi. Madhaya Pradesh-452016. PAN-AALHP0926P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Shreya Jain, CA (VC) Department by Ms. Harpreet

ARHAM ANMOL PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,VILLAGE VALSHIND, BHIWANDI vs. CIRCLE 1 KALYAN, KALYAN, THANE

In the result, the legal grounds challenging the validity of the assessment are dismissed

ITA 5011/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokararham Anmol Projects Dcit Circle 1, Private Limited 2Nd Floor, Rani H. No. 1113, Ground Vs. Mansion, Murbad Floor, Arham Logiparc, Road, Kalyan Nh-3, Nashik Highway, (West), Thane, Village Valshind, Maharashtra – 421 Bhiwandi, Maharashtra – 301 421 302. Pan/Gir No. Aagca9644P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Subhash Bains, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 26.03.2026

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 194CSection 194ISection 234FSection 250

issued is factually incorrect. 16. The learned DR further submitted that there exists concurrent jurisdiction between the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and the Faceless Assessing Officer in proceedings under section 148 and subsequent assessment. Reliance was placed on judicial precedents to contend that pursuant to section 120(5) and the notifications ... issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, including Notification No. 64/2020, the National Faceless Assessment Centre and its units exercise the powers and functions of an Assessing Officer concurrently with the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. It was submitted that section 144B is procedural in nature and transfers only the function

AMARJEET KAUR,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, RUDRAPUR

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 191/DDN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.191/Ddn/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Amarjeet Kaur, Assessment Unit, C/O Matta Garg & Co., Vs. National Faceless Assessment Chartered Accountants, 15, Astley Hall Centre, Income Tax Office, Dehradun 248001. Rudrapur, Pan No.Bzypk0471M Uttarakhand. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 69

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.191/DDN/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम AMARJEET KAUR, ASSESSMENT UNIT, C/o Matta Garg & Co., Vs. National Faceless Assessment Chartered Accountants, 15, Astley Hall Centre, Income Tax Office, Dehradun 248001. Rudrapur, PAN No.BZYPK0471M Uttarakhand. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri S.K. Matta

DCIT-4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. RAJAT SUREKA, INDORE

The appeal is allowed

ITA 426/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2014-15 Dcit 4(1), Rajat Sureka, Indore D-41, Hig Colony, बनाम/ A.B. Road, Vs. Indore (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aksps7189J Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Subhash Chandra, Ar Date Of Hearing 19.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69Section 69C

Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 08.09.2021 passed by learned National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2014-15, the revenue has filed this appeal

MANOJ RAJARAM SHARMA,THANE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8313/MUM/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmanoj Rajaram Ito - 42(3)(4), Sharma, Mumbai Office No. 615, 6Th Vs. Kautilya Bhawan, C- Floor, Centura Square 41-43, Avenue 3, Near It Park, Sg Barve Videsh Bhavan, G Road, Thane, Block, Bkc, Mumbai Maharashtra-400 604. – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Bytps1944K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suryadev Yadav, Shri Karan Hariya & Shri Prashant Gupta, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 4Section 44A

Commissioner erred in upholding the incorrect levy of interest under Sections 234A, 234B, and 234D of the Act, as considered by the Learned National Faceless Assessment Centre. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the Appellant never

MAHESH PRAKASH BENDE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE 27(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 8028/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmahesh Prakash Ito Circle - 27(2), Bende 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, 302, 3Rd Floor, Prithvi Vs. It Office, Vashi Park, Sector-30, Vashi Railway Station Navi Mumbai-400 075 Building, Navi Mubmai – 400 703 Pan/Gir No. Alnpb2531M (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Devendra Jain, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 249Section 249(3)Section 250

compliance was made by the assessee. Subsequently, notices under section 142(1) were issued calling for details. The case was transferred to the National Faceless Assessment Centre under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019. Despite service of notices, including through the Verification Unit, no response was received from the assessee. Thereafter

AMAZON SMART COMMERCE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, DELHI

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3533/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)

liable to be quashed.\n2. That the PCIT erred in invoking revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act qua assessment completed by National Faceless Assessment Centre ('NFAC') under section 143(3) read with sections 144C(3) and 144B of the Act, which is a complete code in itself

DCM SHRIRAM LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 5560/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagemdra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

made in the final assessment order, which are agitated by the appellant before us in the following grounds of appeal. “1. That the National Faceless Assessment Centre ("NaFAC")/Ld. Assessing Officer ("AO") has erred in law and on facts and in the circumstances of the assessee's case in making

SASIREKA BOOPATHI,THANJAVUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THANJAVUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands Partly

ITA 4113/CHNY/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4113/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Sasireka Boopathi, Vs Income Tax Officer, 1/263, Vellalar Street, Thanjavur. Saliyamangalam, Papanasam, Thanjavur – 613504 Pan: Gpfpb2689J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Gokularaman – Ca Revenue By Ms. V Aswathy – Jcit Date Of Hearing 18/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17/03/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2019-20 Dated 19.09.2025. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250

A.Y.2019-20 dated 19.09.2025. The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.4113/CHNY/2025 [A] “ 1. The Assessment Order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Unit is very much inconsistent with the mandatory requirement of Section 151A and as per CBDT's Faceless Assessment Scheme, vide Notification No.18/2022/F.No.370142/16/2022-TPL(Part1) dated 29th ... March,2022. Therefore, the Assessment Order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Unit has become null and void, since Notices under Section 148A(b), Section 148A(d) and Section 148 mentioned in the FACTS were issued by JAO and not by the National Faceless Assessment Unit of Income Tax Department

RUPINDER SINGH DUGGAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1921/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 192Section 54Section 80C

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice under section 148 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is without jurisdiction, being contrary to the procedure prescribed under the E- Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022, notified vide CBDT

TANU PRASAD PHUKAN ,NAZIRA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT (NAFAC), DELHI

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

ITA 270/GTY/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Mar 2026AY 2018-2019

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL `GAUHATI BENCH', GUWAHATI\n\nBEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP\nAND\nSHRI

MEHAR PALLIATIVE CARE TRUST,AHILYANAGAR vs. CIT(E) , NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 217/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.217/Pun/2026 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Meher Palliative Care Trust, Vs. Cit (Exemption), Plot No.1, Gat 515/1/1, Nashik Behind Stone Terrace Cond. Post Meherabad Arangaon, Tal Dist. Ahilyanagar – 414001 Maharashtra Pan : Aaetm1969Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Dayanand Jawalikar

Section 10Section 10(23)(iiiae)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

without appreciating the fact that the notice under section 143(2) has been issued by JAO instead of FAO, thereby violating the provisions of Faceless Assessment. Hence, the addition of Rs. 16,05,432 may please be deleted. 3. On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case

INCOME TAX OFFICER, COIMBATORE vs. SIVAKUMAR SATHYAPRIYA, COIMBATORE

ITA 4107/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

Section 130Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250

notice issued under Section 148 of the Act by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO), given that the Finance Act, 2021 introduced provisions for faceless assessment and the automated allocation of cases, and does not explicitly prohibit the IAO from issuing such notices? D. Whether the CIT(A), while quashing ... consistent with the legislative intent, when the powers to issue the notice u/s 148 remained intact with the JAO ever after bringing the 'Faceless Assessment Scheme'? E. Whether the CIT(A)'s decision to quash the notices issued by the JAO under Section 148 is in alignment with the provisions

BISHNUPRIYA BIJAYCHANDRA MAHANTY,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

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

ITA 4477/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Bishnupriya Bijaychandra Mahanty Ito, Ward 28(1)(1), Mumbai 204 Plot 13/A Wing Siddhivinayak It-Office, Vashi Railway Vs. Chs, Sector 6, Ghansoli, Navi Station Building, Mumbai 400701, Navi Mumbai- 400703 Authroised Person Add: 218, Ratna High Street, Naranpura, Ahmedabad- 380013 Pan No. Btdpm 7308 A Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Pritesh L. Shah (Virtually

Section 1Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69

disclosing total income of Rs. 2,95,315/-. Thereafter the case of . Thereafter the case of sent to National Faceless Assessment( aceless Assessment(NAFC) unit and assess and assessment proceedings were commenced. The assessee was asked to explain proceedings were commenced. The assessee was asked to explain proceedings were commenced

BHUMI POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 755/RJT/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 36(1)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 44A

Brief facts of the case are that the appellant, a private limited company, is\nassessed to tax by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. It is engaged in\nthe business of manufacturing and trading of all types of sprinkler pipes and\ncouplers, drip irrigation system, underlying dripper system and mini sprinkler

SHIV EXTRUSION,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 646/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Extrusion Vs. Income Tax Officer Plot No.3978 Phase Iiiroad Income Tax Office, Ito Ward No.-R Dared, Jamnagar 2(10), Jamnagar, Income 361004, Gujarat, India, Jamnagar Tax Office, Shiv Smruti, Jamnagar, Jamnagar, Gujarat, 361008, Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abkfs7199F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151ASection 250

Section 149(1)(b) case violates the statutory mandate of Section 151. II. Procedural and Substantive Defects 5. Invalidity due to Violation of Mandatory Faceless Assessment Procedure (Section 151A): The notice under Section 148 dated 29.07.2022 was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (ITO Ward 2(10), Jamnagar) (Deep Shekhar

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, WARDHA, WARDHA vs. PADMAKAR KRUSHNAJI WARBHE, HINGANGHAT

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 377/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 40A(3)

memorandum of appeal of revenue, the assessee filed\nhis Cross Objections raising following grounds,\n(1) That the order of the learned AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) Delhi\npassed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B is bad in law and wrong on facts and the learned CIT(A)\nis justified in deleting

KUMAR TALKIES,BAREILLY, UTTAR PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), BAREILLY-NEW, BAREILLY, UTTAR PRADESH

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

ITA 588/LKW/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshrakumar Talkies V. Income Tax Officer-1(1) Punjabi Market, Hospital Road, Fashion Point, 56, Civil Bareilly, Bareilly-243001. Lines Near Prasad Cinema, Bareily-243001. Pan:Aaafk0045M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 254(3)Section 271Section 50C(2)

under: - “1. BECAUSE the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as the same was passed in pursuance of notice u/s 148 issued ... initio. 3. BECAUSE the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as the same was passed without issuing mandatory notice

HITESH SHARMA,KANGRA, HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-PALAMPUR , PALAMPUR

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

ITA 1487/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

much as JAO is not empowered to issue notice under s. 148 of the IT Act. 1961 after the new regime of faceless assessment has been brought into force by the amendment made under s. 148 of the Act, 1961 and as such the assessment order passed in pursuance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 22(1), CHENNAI vs. EZHUMALAI, THIRUKAZHUKUNDRAM

ITA 4108/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4108/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Income Tax Officer, V Ezhumalai, Non Corporate Ward- S 1123, Ponpatharkoodam, 22(1), Tambaram Gangai Amman Koil Street, Thirukazhukundram, Chengalpattu – 603405 Pan: Acipe8113C Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By None Revenue By Ms. V Aswathy – Jcit Date Of Hearing 18/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12/03/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi

Section 120Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

case the Ld. CIT(A) is right in quashing the impugned notice u/s 148 as not valid as it was not issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer, when the fact remains that as per the provisions of Sec. 1448 of the Act, the Faceless Assessing Officer has only powers with ... right in quashing the notice u/s 148, when the fact remains that as per Sec. 1448(116) of the Act, the National Faceless Assessment Centre shall assign the case selected for the purposes of faceless assessment under this section to a specific assessment unit through an automated allocation system indicating

Showing 1–20 of 2,420 · Page 1 of 121

...