← 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

Sayegh Paint Factories India Private Limited, Ernakulam vs. Corporate Cir 2(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 451/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr.AR
Section 144B(6)(vii)Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

144B(6)(vii) of the Act. This 5 Rs. 0 omission amounts to a violation of the principles of natural justice and contravenes the faceless assessment scheme, thereby infringing the Appellant's rights under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. V. Appellant request 14- In light of the above

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Hem Chand Jain, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 670/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, Ld. CIT &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

with section 151A of the Act read with Notification No.18/2022 dt. 29.03.2022 issued by the CBDT. Section 151A of Act is reproduced as under:- Faceless assessment of income escaping assessment 151A. (1) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification in the Official Gazette, for the purposes of assessment

Chhanda Kar, Tamluk vs. ITO, Ward 27(3), Haldia

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1343/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac Through E-Filling.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(3)Section 69

illegal, bad-in-law, and void-ab-initio and liable to be quashed. “2. That the Assessment Order was passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi without issuing the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Without issuing the notice u/s. 148 of the Act, 1961, the National Faceless Assessment ... pass the assessment order. 3. For that Ld. CIT (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre erred in confirming the order of the AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre when the notice u/s 148 dated 20/03/2020 is bad in law since the reasons recorded along with copy of approval prior to the issue

Subramanian Prabhakaran, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tirunchengode

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

ITA 2233/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2233/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Ms. S. Mathangi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148A

assessment has been completed ex- parte, as the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued either by the Jurisdictional A.O. or by the Faceless Assessment Unit. Since both the A.O. and the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the orders without proper participation of the assessee and without examining

Digambar Ramchandra Sawant Bhosle, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer 1 (1), Thane

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 1772/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah/Ms. Mitali Parekh, ARSFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, (Sr.DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 68

order u/s.148A(d) of the Act were issued by the ITO, Ward 1(1), Thane and not by the Faceless authorities under the National Faceless Assessment Center. Thereafter, the proceedings were conducted and the order was passed by the assessment unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s.147 r.w.s.144B

The Kolkkalam Service Cooperative Bank Limited, Malappuram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Tirur, Malappuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 650/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Kolkkalam Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Chengannur P.O., Malappuram 676503 [Pan: Aabat8320L] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 &Tps, Tirur ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Amaljith, P.J., Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith, P.J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271BSection 44ASection 80P(2)(a)

short, the Act’) for Assessment Year 2017-18, date of order 24/07/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short, ‘Ld.AO’) order passed under section 271B of the Act, date of order 25/01/2022. 2 Kolkkalam Service Co-op. Bank

Ananthavoor Service Cooperative Bank Ltd, Malappuram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Tirur, Malappuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 593/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ananthavoor Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant 13/707, Ananthavoor P.O., Malappuram 676301 [Pan: Aadaa0368F] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Tirur ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Amaljith P.J., Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith P.J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 271BSection 44ASection 80P(2)(a)

short, the Act’) for Assessment Year 2017-18, date of order 08/07/2025. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short, ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 271B of the Act, date of order 10/02/2022. 2 Ananthavoor Service Co-op. Bank

Kanippayyur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Guruvayoor, Thrissur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 590/COCH/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kanippayyur Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Kanippayyur, Thrissur 680517 [Pan: Aabtk8207E] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Guruvayoor..... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2025

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271BSection 44ASection 80P

short, the Act’) for Assessment Year 2017-18, date of order 13/06/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short, ‘Ld.AO’) passed under section 271B of the Act, date of order 17/01/2022. 2 Kanippayyur Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 2. The assessee

Sarojben Natvarbhai Patel, Chhotaudepur vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(4), Vadodara

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

ITA 375/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Bakshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 144BSection 148Section 148ASection 149Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

plea that the assessment was made without jurisdiction or in violation of section 144B was unsubstantiated, as the proceedings were carried out under the Faceless Assessment Scheme in accordance with due process. The ClT(Appeals), therefore, dismissed all grounds of appeal and upheld the addition

Arjun Shetty, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Tps, Circle - 1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 61/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19 Arjun Shetty, Vs. Ito, 16-6-393/9 Shubha Krishna Building, Ward – Tps, Highland Falnir, Mangalore - 575002. Circle – 1(1), Pan :Ainps5294H Mangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri. Pranav G Ambekar, V. Narendra Sharma, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Nilanjan Dey,Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025

For Appellant: S/Shri. Pranav G Ambekar, V. Narendra Sharma, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. Nilanjan Dey,JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 10Section 10(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

with PAN : AADFC 8258 P and assessment under section 143(3) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19 was made in faceless assessment on 22.01.2021 by accepting the income returned of agricultural income of Rs.3,24,30,738/- and allowing exemption under section

Mahesh Narsing Choudhary, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28(2)(1), Navi Mumbai

ITA 4769/MUM/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Khushiram JadhwaniFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

learned Income Tax Officer Ward 28(2)(1), Mumbai (JAO) is wholly without jurisdiction as the same can only be issued by National Faceless Assessment Unit (FAO) 1.6 The appellant contends that the in view of the above, the reopening of the assessment is invalid

Shri Powai Sthanakvasi Jain Sangh Trust (Publice Charitable Trust), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 41(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee in this respect are allowed

ITA 3187/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Powai Sthanakvasi Jain Vs Income-Tax Officer, Sangh Trust Ward 41(1)(4), (Public Charitable Trust) Mumbai Flat No. 104, Atlantis A Wing Hiranandani Gardens Powai, Mumbai - 400076 [Pan: Aatts2580C] Appellant Respondent Present For: Assessee : Shri Kirit Sanghvi, Ca Revenue : Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1074570665(1), Dated 17.03.2025 Passed Against The Assessment Order By National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 31.06.2021 For Ay 2018-19. 2. The Only Issue Involved In The Present Appeal Is In Respect Of Treatment Of Corpus Fund Donation Of Rs.1,74,01,475/- Received By The 2 Shri Powai Sthanakvasi Jain Sangh Trust Ay 2018-19 Assessee During The Year As Income Chargeable To Tax Without Considering The Provisions Of Section 11(1)(D) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Sanghvi, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 80G

order of CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1074570665(1), dated 17.03.2025 passed against the assessment order by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated

Bombay Tyres, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -15(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2393/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Bombay Tyres Vs Income-Tax Officer, 23, Arenja Corner, -15(1)(1), Sector-17, Vashi, Mumbai Navi Mumbai – 400703 [Pan: Aagcb1604E] Appellant Respondent Present For: Assessee : Shri Tanzil Padvekar & Shri Gopal Sharma, Advocates Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1057354062(1), Dated 26.10.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi U/S.144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 28.06.2019 For Ay 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1. Considering The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Has Erred In Confirming The Order U/S. 144 R.W.S. 144A Dated 28Th June, 2019 Passed By The Assessing Officer Without Appreciating The Merits Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil Padvekar and Shri Gopal Sharma, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

order of CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057354062(1), dated 26.10.2023 passed against the assessment order by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi u/s.144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 28.06.2019 for AY 2017-18. 2. Grounds taken

Mandakini Dkhar, Lumshnong vs. ACIT, Circle - 2, Guwahati

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 19/GTY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), where also she could not succeed. The Ld. CIT(A) mainly relied on the findings of the Ld. AO. It is also seen from para 18 at page 11 of the impugned order that the Ld. CIT(A) was considerably persuaded by the fact that the notice issued by the Ld. AO for eliciting response from the assessee, were not adequately responded to. It is also seen from the impugned order that attempts to verify the nature and extent of business from the VAT returns pertaining to the state of Megha

Section 10(26)Section 115BSection 250Section 69A

MEMBER I.T.A. No. 19/GTY/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mandakini Dkhar, Paysyih, Villmynsa, Jowai, Meghalaya - 793150 [PAN: BEDPD6115F] .....................…...……………....Appellant vs. The Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ........................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Vikash Dokania Anil Jha, ARs Department represented by : Kausik Ray, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing

Palas Gram Sewa Sahkari Samiti Limited, Sikar vs. ITO, Sikar

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

ITA 1017/JPR/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Oct 2025AY 2020-2021
For Appellant: Sh. Jitendra Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gajendra Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 250Section 253(5)Section 80A(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

because the assessee has challenged the assessment order dated 24.09.2022 passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, [ for short “Act”] by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [ for short AO]. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

Chungath Varghese Sunny, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), Chennai

ITA 1802/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1801 To 1805/Chny/2025 & 1806 To 1810/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2017-18 To 2021 -22 & 2017-18 To 2021-22 Chungath Varghese Sunny, 275-276, Cross Cut Road, Gandhipuram, Coimbatore – 641 012. [Pan:Ageps-1475-K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Dcit, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Ten Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Different Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai 20 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Id.Cit(A)”] Arising Out Of The Orders Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 3(3), Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ao”], U/S.153C R.W.S 143(3)/143(3)/270A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] For The Assessment Years (“Ay/Ays”) 2017-18 To 2021-22. These Appeals Bearing Ita Nos.1801 To 1805/Chny/2025 Pertain To The Assessment Orders Passed U/S.153C R.W.S.143(3)/143(3) Of The Act, Whereas The Appeals Bearing Ita Nos.1806 To 1810/Chny/2025 Pertain To The Penalty Orders Passed U/S.270A Of The Act. 2. Since The Issues Involved In All The Five Assessment Years Under Consideration Are Identical In Nature & The Arguments Advanced By Both The Parties Are Common, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. We Shall First Address The Quantum Assessments.

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 270A

which is extracted below for ready reference: - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT Income Tax Department Faceless Assessment: India To, CHUNGATH VARGHESE SUNNY 275-276 275-276, CROSS CUT ROAD GANDHIPURAM 641012, Tamil Nadu India PAN: AGEPS1475K Assessment Year: 2017-18 DIN & Notice No.: ITBA/PNL/S/270A/2022- 23/1051443411

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department vs. True Value Homes (India) Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1213/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri. C.N. Bipin, C.I.T
Section 142(1)Section 142ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 44ASection 69

National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as Ld.CIT-A), in respect of the assessment order dated 31.01.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as Ld.AO) for the assessment year 2018-19 (hereinafter referred to as the impugned assessment :-2-: ITA. No.:1213 /Chny/2025 year) u/s.143

Thomas Victor, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non Corp Ward 19(6), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2987/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.R. Venkata Raman, CA
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 271D

Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act”), dated 31.03.2022, by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward–19(6), Chennai (“JAO”), is in contravention of the Faceless Assessment Scheme notified by the Central Government on 29.03.2022 pursuant to Section 151A of the Act, hence the same is invalid ... dated 31.03.2022, by the Income Tax Officer, Non- Corporate Ward–19(6), Chennai (“JAO”), which according to him is in contravention of the Faceless Assessment Scheme notified by the Central Government on 29.03.2022 pursuant to Section 151A of the Act. Hence according to him, the reopening notice u/s.148 is invalid

Weg Industries (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assessing Officer, Bmtc Building

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

ITA 2501/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2021-22

For Respondent: Shri Sumeet Khurana , CA
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 92C(3)

Rs.NIL. The return was picked up for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi specifying the reason that there are high risk international transaction / entity reported in CbCR data along with other reason. As the case of the assessee

DCIT, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Ei Resorts & Clubs Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

3213/Mum/2025

ITA 3926/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 69A

Circular 19 of 2019 is bad in law and is liable to be quashed. B) Notice issued by the jurisdictional Assessing officer instead of faceless Assessing officer (i) The AR also pointed out that the notice under section 148 was issued by jurisdictional Assessing officer in contravention E I Resorts ... Bombay HC) Notice under section 148 was issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Officer in contravention of scheme of Faceless assessment. The Hon HC held that, there is no question of concurrent jurisdiction of the JAO and the FAO for issuance of notice under section 148 or even