← All Phrases

“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
97
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
88
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
55
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
53
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
50
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
50
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

Sonia Bhaskar, New Delhli vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 5649/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalsonia Bhaskar Vs. National Faceless Assessment B22 Maharani Baghi Centre Delhi- 110065 Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabps2386J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sonia Bhaskar Vs. National Faceless Assessment B22 Maharani Baghi Centre Delhi- 110065 Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AABPS2386J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : None Respondent by : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date ... order dated 09.09.2021 passed u/s 143 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “AO”) for AY: 2018-19. P a g e | 2 Sonia Bhaskar (AY: 2018-19) 2. None appeared

Mr. Jitendra Walia, Hardwar vs. ITO, W-1(3)(1) 44(2), Haridwar

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

ITA 115/DDN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalmr. Jitendra Walia, Income Tax Officer, 653, Sarai Road, Ward-1(3)(1), 44(2), Jwalapur, Haridwar-249407. Vs. Haridwar. Pan:Abvpw9014C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. & Shri Sandeep Yadav, Adv. Department By Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.11.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘The Cit(A) In Short) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 22.04.2025 For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, It Is Seen That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Dismissed By The Ld. Cit(A) For Non-Prosecution. Before Us, The Ld. Ar Submitted That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Issued Notices Which Were Delivered To The Registered Email Address Of The Appellant & Were Also Uploaded In The Portal Of The Department, However, The Assessee Was Not Aware Of The Proceedings Nor Such Notices Were Brought To His Knowledge By The Accountant Of The Assessee, Therefore, The Necessary Compliance Could Not Be Made Either Before The Ao Or Before The Cit(A). He Thus

Section 250

assessee. 4. After considering the arguments, we find that in the instant case, the assessee was not aware of such drastic changes in faceless assessment schemes and was unware of all the activities like issue of notices through email and to respond such notices online, therefore, due compliance could

Kusum Mittal, Sangrur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - Sangrur, Sangrur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 941/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

legally competent to issue notice under section 148 of the Act as the same was required to be issued by National Faceless Assessment Centre and as such the proceedings initiated are illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the notice issued u/s 148 is barred by limitation as held ... issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO), whereas, in view of the Notification dated 29.03.2022 issued by the Ministry of Finance, only the Faceless Assessing Officer was competent to issue such notice. It was argued that this defect strikes at the root of jurisdiction and renders the proceedings

Dhanalakshmi, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-8(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2473/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2473/Chny/2025 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT (virtual)
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

bank accounts, but has not filled return of income, reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act on 04.04.2022. Subsequently , Faceless Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred as “FAO”) has passed assessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act, making an addition of Rs.96 ... challenged the reassessment proceeding void-ab-initio as the notice for reopening was issued by J.A.O in violation of CBDT instructions of faceless assessment scheme. The Ld. AR has argued that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for the reason that there was 14 days delay in filling appeal

Mannagatti Radhabai, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Ncw-22(4), Tambaram

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

ITA 2450/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2450/Chny/2025 िनधा7रण वष7 /Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Sanchita, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. M.Subashri, Addl. CIT(virtual)
Section 147Section 148Section 151A

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

Mohamed Imran, Vellore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vellore

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

ITA 2445/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2445/Chny/2025 िनधा7रण वष7 /Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT(virtual)
Section 147Section 148Section 151A

Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred as “JAO”) has reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 09.03.2024. The Faceless Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred as “FAO”) has passed the order u/s. 147 of the Act assessing total income at Rs. 23,49,385/-. On appeal ... 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

Viacom 18, Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. PCIT-8, Mumbai

ITA 2591/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal/Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 32

learned PCIT'] under section 263 of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') wherein he set aside the assessment order passed by the faceless assessment unit (in short 'the Assessing Officer') holding it to be erroneous insofar as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The grounds raised ... transfer pricing reference was also made for determination of the arm's-length price of the international transactions carried out by the assessee. The faceless assessment unit passed assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act on 26/09/2022 determining total loss

Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur vs. Rahul Kathuria, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 152/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148

appellant has assailed the assessment order on technicalities of non-adherence to provisions of section 151A which governs the scheme of faceless assessment in case of income escapements. The appellant pleads that by the virtue of CBDT's notification dated 29.03.2022, the notice u/s 11 ITO/ITO-3(1), Raipur

Income Tax Officer, Raipur vs. Rahul Kathuria, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 151/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148

appellant has assailed the assessment order on technicalities of non-adherence to provisions of section 151A which governs the scheme of faceless assessment in case of income escapements. The appellant pleads that by the virtue of CBDT's notification dated 29.03.2022, the notice u/s 11 ITO/ITO-3(1), Raipur

Tirathraj Rajmurat Maurya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(6), Surat

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law and without jurisdiction as NFAC was not empowered under any valid Notification to frame assessments under the faceless scheme prior ... respect of this additional ground, the appellant respectfully submits that the re-assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is without jurisdiction and bad in law, as the NFAC had no statutory authority to frame assessments in faceless mode prior

Tirathraj Rajmurat Maurya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(6), Surat

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 504/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law and without jurisdiction as NFAC was not empowered under any valid Notification to frame assessments under the faceless scheme prior ... respect of this additional ground, the appellant respectfully submits that the re-assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is without jurisdiction and bad in law, as the NFAC had no statutory authority to frame assessments in faceless mode prior

Tirathraj Rajmurat Maurya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(6), Surat

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 501/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law and without jurisdiction as NFAC was not empowered under any valid Notification to frame assessments under the faceless scheme prior ... respect of this additional ground, the appellant respectfully submits that the re-assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is without jurisdiction and bad in law, as the NFAC had no statutory authority to frame assessments in faceless mode prior

Ajithkumar Singu, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward (International Taxation), Vijayawada

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

ITA 348/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.348/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2021-22) Vs. Ajithkumar Singu The Income Tax Officer Ward (International Taxation) D.No. 8-76-1, Murikipudi Income Tax Office Chilakaluripeta C.R. Building, Annex Ramachandrapuram M.G. Road Guntur – 522626 Vijayawada – 520002 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Etxps2554D]

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

scrutiny under CASS to verify the claim of large exempt income and notice under section 143(2) was issued on 28.06.2022 by National Faceless Assessment Centre (in short “NFAC"). Later, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.08.2022 calling for information was issued and served on the assessee

Arkay Energy (Rameswarm) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1562/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1562/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. Arkay Energy (Rameswarm) Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan: Aafca0044C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 20/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 26/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.07.2025 Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, SR-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250

failed to appreciate the fact that the notice u/s 148 dated 31/03/2024 was issued by the DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad instead of National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi, as mandated u/s 151A r.w.s 144B of the Act, which is invalid & without jurisdiction. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) failed ... SRINIVASA RAO CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD 6. Thus the notice was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer without following the procedure as per the National Faceless Assessment Scheme notified by the Government. An identical issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Meghana Enterprises (supra

Epam Systems India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle -8 (1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 83/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.83 & 498/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Epam Systems India The Dcit & The Acit, Private Limited, Vs. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081 Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw2012R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Shreyas Sardesai राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Shreyas SardesaiFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

ITA.No.83/Hyd./2022 – A.Y. 2017-2018 : 2. The has raised the following grounds of appeal : “The Appellant objects to the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 28 January 2022 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 1448 of the Income ... while dealing with the issue of validity of the notice issued u/sec.148 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer [in short "JAO" instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (in short "FAO" as per the Faceless Assessment Scheme has quashed the notice issued u/sec. 148 by the JAO and consequently, re-assessment order

Epam Systems India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 498/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.83 & 498/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Epam Systems India The Dcit & The Acit, Private Limited, Vs. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081 Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw2012R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Shreyas Sardesai राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Shreyas SardesaiFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

ITA.No.83/Hyd./2022 – A.Y. 2017-2018 : 2. The has raised the following grounds of appeal : “The Appellant objects to the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 28 January 2022 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 1448 of the Income ... while dealing with the issue of validity of the notice issued u/sec.148 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer [in short "JAO" instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (in short "FAO" as per the Faceless Assessment Scheme has quashed the notice issued u/sec. 148 by the JAO and consequently, re-assessment order

Vlspl 136 Vangloor Paccs, Vellore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vellore

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

ITA 2609/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2609/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Vlspl 136 Vangloor Primary The Ito, Agricultural Coop. Credit Society, Ward-1, Vlspl 136 Vangloor Pacb, Vellore. Walajapet, Vellore-632 513. [Pan: Aabav 0564 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

issue has held as under: 1. A common issue has arisen in the captioned petitions, i.e., whether the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (‘JAO’) or the Faceless Assessing Officer (‘FAO’) would have the jurisdiction to initiate re-assessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act, hereinafter ... 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

Sa Feeds, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-2, Namakkal

ITA 2550/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH: CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यायिक

Vellaisamy Natarajan, Pudhukurichi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karaikudi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.TFor Respondent: 19.11.2025
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69

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 ... pleased to dismiss the petition 2. on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted that this Court has, in many

Kgn Fitness & Development Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-4(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2370/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 271(1)(c)

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 ... Judge was pleased to dismiss the petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 :-10-: ITA Nos. 2369 & 2370/Chny/2025 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. 3. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted