“faceless assessment”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144BSection 144B2,420 judgments

The decision most relied on for faceless assessment is Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. ITO (156 Taxmann.com 178), cited in 213 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on faceless assessment

Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. ITO

156 Taxmann.com 178 · 2023 · High Court

213

citing judgments

A notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if the Income Tax Department fails to follow the prescribed procedures, including obtaining the necessary approvals under section 151 or adhering to the faceless assessment scheme mandates under section 151A.

Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India

165 Taxmann.com 115 · 2024 · High Court

106

citing judgments

The faceless assessment scheme under Section 151A applies from the stage of issuing show cause notices under Sections 148 and 148A, and non-compliance with the scheme or related notifications vitiates the subsequent assessment proceedings. Assessment proceedings are considered to commence upon the issuance of such a show cause notice.

Ram Narayan Sah v. Union of India

163 Taxmann.com 478 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

A notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot be issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer after the introduction of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B. Such a notice is invalid as it defeats the object of faceless assessment and is not in consonance with CBDT notifications.

T.K.S. Builders (P) Ltd. v. ITO

469 ITR 657 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Section 144B of the Income Tax Act does not completely divest the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) of their power to assess or reassess, even with the introduction of the Faceless Reassessment Scheme.

Triton Overseas (P) Ltd. v. Union of India

156 Taxmann.com 318 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

A notice under Section 148 for income escaping assessment issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is invalid if it does not comply with Section 151A and relevant CBDT notifications concerning faceless assessment.

Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

466 ITR 474 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Reassessment notices under Section 148A, issued in the context of faceless assessment proceedings, must be issued by the designated Faceless Assessing Officer and not by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

Mark Studio India (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, High Court of Madras

169 Taxmann.com 542 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

The National Faceless Assessment Centre (NaFAC) does not have the power to issue notices under Section 148 or 148A of the Income Tax Act. Its jurisdiction for assessment or reassessment begins only from the stage of issuing notices under Section 142(1) or 143(2).

Samp Furniture (P) Ltd. v. ITO

165 Taxmann.com 581 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

The issuance of a notice under section 148A, including the order under section 148A(d), is a mandatory procedural step before reassessment proceedings can be initiated under section 147/148. Failure to comply with this requirement renders the subsequent reassessment proceedings invalid.

Judgments citing faceless assessment

Kadimi Special Steels Private Limited(Amalgamated With Kadimi Tool Manufacturing Company Private Limited), Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-13(1), Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2246/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)

Assessment Year 2017-18 and 2018-19 respectively. 1. That the final order passed by the Ld Assessing Officer ('AO"), Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre ('NaFAC) giving effect to the order of the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) and the Kadini Special Steels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT directions

Kadimi Special Steels Private Limited(Amalgamated With Kadimi Tool Manufacturing Company Private Limited), New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-13(1), Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2245/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)

Guman Singh Kushwah, Shivpuri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ashoknagar

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

ITA 544/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshgumnam Singh Kushwah, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Infront Of Collector Kothi, Ashok Nagar, Shiv Colony, Shivpuri, Mp Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Bcjpk2729Q Assessee By : Shri Ashish Goyal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194Section 194ISection 201Section 206ASection 50C

passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 16.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. One of the ground raised before me is that the learned NFAC had mechanically confirmed

Nayana Jayesh Patel, Indore vs. Assessing Officer, Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 475/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 147Section 250Section 50c

Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 19.03.2022 passed by learned National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 263 & 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2012-13, the assessee

Virendra Kumar Mandot, Sadar Bazar Sailana Ratlam vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO-1, Ratlam

ITA 382/IND/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

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

Section 147Section 44ASection 69Section 69A

Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 22.08.2021 passed by learned National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) & 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee ... NFAC (A) erred in sustaining the impugned Re-assessment order 22/08/2021 passed u/s 147 for A.Y 2017-18 (Financial Year 2016-17) by National Faceless Assessment Centre is illegal, perverse and without jurisdiction. 3. That without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Vishal Ramesh Fegade, Aurangabad vs. Assessing Officer, Ward 1(5), Aurangabad

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

ITA 2503/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2503/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Vishal Ramesh Fegade, Vs. Ito, Ward- 1(5), A-B-8, Tapadia Pride, Aurangabad. Paithan Road, Aurangabad- 431001. Pan : Aanpf6699K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Anup Shaha Revenue By : Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 14.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Manish Borad, Am: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 27.08.2025 Which Is Arising Out Of The Assessment Order U/S 147 Of The Act For Assessment Year 2020-21 Framed On 17.03.2013 By The Ito, Ward-1(5), Aurangabad. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. I, Vishal Ramesh Fegade, Am A Salaried Employee & My Primary Source Of Income Is Derived Solely From My Employment. I Would Like To Explicitly State That I Have Not Made Any Cash Payments In Relation To The Purchase Of The Property In Question. All Payments Made Towards The Acquisition Of The Property Have Been Conducted Through Formal Banking Channels, Ensuring Full Transparency & Compliance With Legal Requirements. The Details Of These Payments Are Clearly Outlined In The Purchase Deed.

For Appellant: Shri Anup ShahaFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha (Virtual)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 69

CBDT notification the notice under section 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961 ought to have been issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) and not by the AO. Thus, the notice issued under section 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961 seems to be viod ab initio

Anthonysamy Innasi, Thanjavur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Thanjavur

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

ITA 3276/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3276/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri Anthonysamy Innasi, The Income Tax Officer, 187, Melaiyur, Nadar Street, Vs. Ward 1(1), Thiruvidaimarudur, Thanjavur Thanjavur – 612 101. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Akfpi 0542L (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S. Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026 आदेश/Order Per George George K: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 22.09.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called 'The Act'). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2020-21. :-2 -:

For Appellant: Shri S. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

does not matter if the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issues the notice and it is not mandatory that it should be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Another learned Single Judge in order dated 21.04.2025 in WP No.22402 of 2024 and batch cases, followed what was held

Gnanamani Thuraichi, Tenkasi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Tirunelveli

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

ITA 3263/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3263/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Gnanamani Thuraichi, The Income Tax Officer, 7-3-3(8), Palace Street, Vs. Ward 1, Anaikulam, Tirunelveli Kamarajar Nagar, Tenkasi – 627 859. Pan: Bdmpg 5319J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri K. Vishwa Padmanaban, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri K. Vishwa Padmanaban, CAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Anbazhagan Elango, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kancheepuram

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

ITA 3249/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3249/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Jj709 Eguvarpalayam Paccs, Thiruvallur vs. ITO, Ward-1., Thiruvallur

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

ITA 3216/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3216/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri B. Suresh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

G770 Mettupalayam Paccs Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-8(2), Chennai

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

ITA 3215/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri B. Suresh, CAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Jayaraman Srinivasan, Chengalpet vs. ITO, Ncw-22(4), Tambaram

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

ITA 3203/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3203/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

S 1284 Thathaiyangarpatti Paccs Ltd., Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-2, Namakkal

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

ITA 3173/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3173/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri A. Tamilamudan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8364/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

reassessment proceedings culminated in orders passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 and section 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer or AO”). 2.2. The reopening for all the years was based on information received from the Investigation Wing

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8363/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8362/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8361/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

Arvind Bhaguji Kangane, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-27(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 and 3 of appeal are

ITA 4158/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Ms. Padmavathy S(Physical Hearing) Arvind Bhanguji Kangane Dcit, Circle – 27(1), Mumbai Shreyas Building, 11Th Road, Plot No. 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Vs 553, Flat No. 901, 9Th Floor, Opp. Railway Station Building, Navi Heritage Pride Building, Chembur, Mumbai – 400703. Mumbai – 400026. [Pan: Afypk1856R] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 254(1)Section 68

ground of appeal: “1.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the re-assessment order passed u/s.147 dated 23/03/2022 by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law, since the scheme for faceless assessment of income escaping assessment prescribed u/s.151A had been notified by the CBDT ... also raised additional ground of appeal. In the additional ground of appeal, the assessee has challenged the validity of assessment order passed by faceless assessing officer. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that scheme of faceless assessment about reassessment that is income escaping assessment was brought on the statute

Kanchan Rawal, Delhi vs. ITO NFAC Ward - 36 (1), New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 9010/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 147Section 56(2)(x)

DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Kanchan Rawal, Vs. Income Tax Officer/ National H. No.136, 2nd Floor, Faceless Assessment Order Pitampura, Rohini, Centre, JAO:ITO, Ward-36(1) New Delhi-110088 New Delhi PAN: ADKPR5554P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ashok Ojha, Adv. Department

Badariprasad, Guna vs. Income Tax Officer Guna, Guna

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 473/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshbadriprasad, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Heerabagh Colony, Guna, Guna, Gwalior Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Arapr6314B

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

appeal, the preliminary issue to be decided is whether the assumption of jurisdiction for reopening the assessment by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer(JAO) as against Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) could be considered as valid. This goes to the root of the matter and hence I deem it fit to address this ... What is covered in clause 3(a) of the Scheme is already provided in Section 144B(1) of the Act, which Section provides for faceless assessment, and covers assessment, reassessment or recomputation under Section 147 of the Act. Therefore, if Revenue's arguments are to be accepted, there