“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

Mfx Infotech Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 251/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.It(Tp)A No. 251/Bang/2021 (Assessment Year: 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144B

liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO erred in not passing the order in conformity with the procedure prescribed in faceless assessment scheme under section 144B of the Act. 3. The learned AO has erred in making an addition of Rs. 5,18,74,725 to the total income

Bangalore Dor Tech Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 826/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V P Pavankumar

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Pronouncement : 20.10.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This appeal is against the order dated 24.6.2022 of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [NFAC] for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The only issue in this appeal is regarding disallowance of delayed payment of employee contribution

Natural Remedies Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 755/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V P Pavan Kumar

Section 115JSection 143(2)

hearing : 20.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 20.10.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This appeal is against the order of National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [NFAC] dated 28.6.2022 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture, sale and distribution

M/S Champion Advance Materials Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1974/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 31/03/2022 by the ld. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). 2 M/s. Champion Advance Materials Pvt. Ltd., 2. Though the assessee has raised the various grounds

M/S. Mysore Mercantile Company Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 551/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Mr. Mohammed Mujassim, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 140A(3)Section 221Section 221(1)

Pronouncement : 17.10.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This appeal is against the order of the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [NFAC] dated 09.05.22 for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The assessee \ raised following grounds of appeal: “NO PENALTY CAN BE IMPOSED THERE

M/S. Tivo Tech Private Limited (Formerly Known As Veveo (India) Private Limited), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 237/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 37

Tribunal in the case of Swiss Re Global Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Addl./Jt./Dy./Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax/ITO, National Faceless Assessment Centre (Order dated 21.01.2022 passed in IT(TP)A No. 397/Bang/2021). The ld AR also prayed that a credit period of 90 days

Ntt Data Fa Insurance Systems (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 261/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.261/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 92C

this Tribunal in the case of Swiss Re Global Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Addl./Jt./Dy./Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax/ITO, National Faceless Assessment Centre (Order dated 21.01.2022 passed in IT(TP)A No. 397/Bang/2021). Without prejudice, Ld. A.R. submitted that TPO erred in making an addition

Ge Be Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 304/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.304/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vs. Dcit, M/S. Ge Be Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 3(1)(1), 60, Export Promotion Industrial Park, Bengaluru. Whitefield, Bengaluru – 560 066. Pan : Aaacg 6714 A Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Aliasgar Rampurawala, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.09.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Aliasgar Rampurawala, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

Vasudevan, Vice President This is an appeal by the assessee against the final Order of Assessment dated 25.02.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (DCIT, Circle – 3(1)(1), Bengaluru), under section 143(3) read with Section 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

Waterfield Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals are allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2102/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Floor, Rupam Building, 239, P D Mello Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 013 [PAN: AAACF8177A] Vs. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Income-Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Circle 6(1)(2), Mumbai ………………….…… Respondent ITA No.: 2083/Mum/2022 Assessment year: 2011-12 Narang Connect Pvt. Ltd. ……………...………… Appellant B-869, 2nd Floor, Sarkar

Forbes Facility Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT, NFAC, Circle 6 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2051/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Delicacies & More, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals are allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1996/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

M/S Te Connectivity India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-2, Bengaluru

ITA 200/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 2593/Bang/2019 M/S. Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Acit, 2015-16 Te Park, 22B, Doddenakundi Corporation, Circle – 2, 2Nd Phase, Industrial Area, Large Taxpayer Unit, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan: Aabct 7374 C 372/Bang/2021 -Do- -Do- 2016-17 200/Bang/2022 -Do- Dcit, Ltu, 2017-18 Circle – 2, Bengaluru. 716/Bang/2022 -Do- Acit, 2018-19 Circle – 7(1)(1), Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 92

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). ii. Assessment Year 2016-17 – Final Order of Assessment dated 31.05.2021 passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Act. iii.Assessment Year 2017-18 – Final Order of Assessment dated ... passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Act. iv.Assessment Year 2018-19 – Final Order of Assessment dated 30.06.2022 passed by ACIT, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bengaluru, under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C

M/S Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu Circle-2, Bangalore

ITA 372/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 92

M/S. Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2, Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2593/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 92Section 92ASection 92F

Dr. Sankaran Sundar, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(7), Bangalore

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

ITA 572/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sri. Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 269SSection 271D

Appeals] erred in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant as withdrawn and infructuous without cancelling the impugned penalty order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre under Section 271D of the Act dated 14.02.2022 or without giving a direction to the learned assessing officer to issue refund of penalty after

Spica Elastica Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 747/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Spica Elastica Pvt. Ltd National Faceless Assessment 477, Chandra Chowk Seth Centre Mooljee Jaitha Cloth Market, Vs. Shaik Memon Street, Kalbadevi, Delhi Mumbai-400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacs6153K Assessee By : Shri Bhavin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Samuel Pitta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2022 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Pitta, DR

Section 143Section 144BSection 144CSection 92C

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM Spica Elastica Pvt. Ltd National Faceless Assessment 477, Chandra Chowk Seth Centre Mooljee Jaitha Cloth Market, Vs. Shaik Memon Street, Kalbadevi, Delhi Mumbai-400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACS6153K Assessee ... pronouncement : 20.09.2022 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by assessee against Assessment order passed by National faceless assessment Centre [ NFAC] [The ld AO ] u/s 143 (3) read with Section 144C (13) read with Section 144B of The Income

Iron Mountain Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 307/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.307/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Iron Mountain Services Private Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Level 10, Citrine Building Bagmane World Circle – 3(1)(1), Technology Centre, 4, Outer Ring Road, Bengaluru. Mahadevpura, Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aahcm 2578 F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Chavali Narayanan, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 20.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.02.2022 Of National Faceless Assessment Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (Hereinafter Referred To As The Assessing Officer, “Ao” In Short) Passed U/S.143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) In Relation To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee In Engaged In The Business Of Provision Of Information Technology Enabled Services (Ites), To Its Wholly Owned Holding Company. In Terms Of The Provisions Of Sec.92-A Of The Act, The Assessee & Its Wholly

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayanan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)Section 92C

Vasudevan, Vice President: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.02.2022 of National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer, “AO” in short) passed u/s.143(3) read with Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) in relation

Etisalat Software Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 240/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Bharadwaj Sheshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92D

Pronouncement : 20.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This appeal is against the final assessment order passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the IT Act dated 10.2.2022 for the ay 2017-18. 2. The assessee raised the following concise

Jice Academy for Excellence Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 704/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Nulvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

assessment year 2017- 18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. “The order of the Assessing Officer of National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi is against the fact and circumstances of the case and equity. 2. On the fact and circumstances of the case, under the provision ... under the judicial precedence, the Assessing Officer of National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi erred in levying the penalty u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the loan is received from the Executive Directors to the Company, who are JICE Academy for Excellence Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page

M/S. Te Connectivity Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 191/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sit(Tp)A No.191/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Te Connectivity Services India Private Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Limited, Delhi. 59/2, 1St Floor, Gurudas Heritage, Block-B, 100 Feet Ring Road, Banashankari 2Nd Stage, Bengaluru – 560 070. Pan: Aafct 3474 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 92Section 92C

VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.191/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/s. TE Connectivity Services India Private Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Limited, Delhi. 59/2, 1st Floor, Gurudas Heritage, Block-B, 100 Feet Ring Road, Banashankari 2nd Stage, Bengaluru – 560 070. PAN: AAFCT ... Vasudevan, Vice President : This is an appeal by the assessee against the final Order of Assessment dated 27.01.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’), relating to Assessment