← 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

Pichaimani Gunasundari, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Nc-22(1), Tambaram

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

ITA 2333/CHNY/2025[2019-20 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2333/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Pichaimani Gunasundari, The Ito, No.65, Saratha Flats, Non-Corporate Ward-22(1), Ganapathi Nagar, Tambaram. 4Th Street, Urapakkam, Kancheepuram-603 210. [Pan: Cqgpg 6518 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

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

Ajay Mittal, Rohtak vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2 Rewari, Rewari

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

ITA 5510/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147

hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”], Delhi, in appeal no. NFAC/2013-14/10111613 vide order dated 23.10.2024. Assessment was framed by Income Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’), for the Assessment Year 22014- 15 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income

Meena Jain, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward-53(92), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4072/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Mrs. Meena Jain, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-702, Rail Vihar Apartments, Ward-53(92), Sector 15, Gurugram Gurugram Pin: 122 001 Haryana Pan :Aahpj3007B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 148Section 250Section 271F

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.05.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arising out of penalty order dated ... assessee is in appeal before us raising following ground of appeal: “On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) erred in confirming penalty of Rs.5000/- imposed under Section 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 5. During the hearing before

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Megha Garg, Delhi

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

ITA 3488/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Income Tax Officer, Megha Garg, 1707 E-2 Block Civic Centre, 160 Saraswati Vihar Vaishali, New Delhi-110002 Vs Pitampura, Delhi-110034 Pan-Aecpg7098C Appellant Respondent

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68Section 69A

/2012-13/10260068, arising out of order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal contesting the order of Ld. First Appellate

Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Delhi vs. Ld. ITO, Ward 35(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3447/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2021-22] Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Income Tax Officer, Ward-35(1), B-2/38, Ground Floor, E-2, Civic Centre, Delhi-110002 Ashok Vihar, Phase-Ii, Vs Delhi-110052 Pan-Aafhr8657H Appellant Respondent

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 270A

arising out of penalty order dated 16.06.2023 passed u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. Contesting the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 31.03.2025 confirming penalty u/s 270A imposed

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Ghaziabad vs. Arun Kumar, Ghaziabad

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1093/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Assistant Commissioner Of Arun Kumar, Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Ii F-3, Nehru Nagar, 201-202, 2Nd Floor, Cgo-1, Vs Uttar Pradesh-201001 Near Purani Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan-Aeapk1314B Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.117/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1093/Del/2025) [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Arun Kumar, Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ii F-3, Nehru Nagar, Tax, Circle-2(1), 201-202, 2Nd Floor, Cgo-1, Near Uttar Pradesh-201001 Vs Purani Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan-Aeapk1314B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.10.2025 Order Per Amitabh Shukla, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)

/2012-13/10276555, arising out of order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14. The assessee has also filed Cross Objection. 2. The appeal of the Revenue and the Cross

Care Today Fund, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward Exemption 1(3), Civic Centre New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5734/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Care Today Fund, Vs. Income Tax Officer, F-26, First Floor, Exemption 1(3), Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi-1100 01 Pan :Aaatc3762B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 80G(5)(vi)

VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is against order dated 30.10.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as “the Ld. CIT(A)”) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising

Flint Power Tools (P) Ltd, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5642/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Flint Power Tools (P) Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Plot Nos. 594, 595, Central Circle-1, Sector 8 Imt Manesar, Faridabad-I, New-1 Gurugram, Haryana Pan: Aadcn0078K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CA & Shri AnkitFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 250(6)Section 37

conducted on 10.11.2021 at the residential as well as office premises of LSL Tools Group of companies and others. Consequent upon implementation of the Faceless Assessment Scheme, Search cases were transferred from the jurisdictional assessing authorities to the central charges by the Ld. PCIT, Gurugram vide order dated

Goodone Traders Private Limited, Delhi vs. CIT(A), Delhi

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

ITA 5591/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Goodone Traders Private Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Limited, 886A/47 (Appeals), Ward No. 6, Mehrauli Delhi Delhi- 1100 30 Pan: Aaacy2998Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Meenal Goyal, CA, Ms. VidhiFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal of assessee is against order dated 24.10.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as “the Ld. C) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising out of assessment

Sahdev Gupta, New Delhi vs. Faceless Assessment, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 4234/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4234/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 बनाम Sahdev Gupta, Faceless Assessment, 6/855, Main Bazar, Mehrauli, Vs. New Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Acspg7739G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149

NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4234/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 बनाम SAHDEV GUPTA, FACELESS ASSESSMENT, 6/855, Main Bazar, Mehrauli, Vs. New Delhi. Delhi. PAN No.ACSPG7739G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Meenal Goyal, CA & Shri Abhinav Jain, CA Revenue

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Office vs. Ritu Bala, Faridabda

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3621/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Income Tax Officer, Ritu Bala, Vs. Faridabad 4237 Indra Prashtha Colony, Haryana Faridabad – 121 001 Haryana Pan :Bdhpb1495B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 148Section 148ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 69C

VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the Revenue is against order dated 27.05.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as “the Ld. CIT(A)”) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising ... dated 29-03-2022 issued by the CBDT. Hence the said notice is invalid as has been issued other than faceless mode. 2. National Faceless Assessment Centre (NaFAC) erred in framing assessment without issuing mandatory notice u/s 143(2). 8 ITA No. 3621/Del.2024 It is seen that the appellant

Sai Baba Agency, Vishal Tower Navlakha vs. ITO 5(1) Indore, Main Building Indore

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 324/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Paresh M Joshisai Baba Agency, Income Tax Officer-5(1), 35, Vishal Tower, Indore Navlakha, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Acxfs4495A Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ar Revenue By Ms. Ila Parmer Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 23.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad, Am: This Appeal By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Dated

Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

Appeals), New Delhi for A.Y.2017-18 which is arising from the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 20.04.2023 framed by Faceless Assessment Unit Centre, Delhi. 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 67 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The aassessee has submitted

Meenakshi Academy of Higher Education & Research (Maher), Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward 3, Chennai

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

ITA 2323/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2323/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Meenakshi Academy Of Higher Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Education & Research [Maher], Exemptions Ward 3, 12, Vembuli Amman Koil Street, Chennai. West K.K. Nagar, Chennai 600 078. [Pan: Aaetm9880C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 08.08.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, The Ld. Ar Shri R. Venkata Raman, Ca Drew Our Attention To The Application Seeking Permission To File Additional Grounds Of Appeal Dated 23.10.2025 Placed

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

prejudice to the above grounds, that the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act dated 30.03.2022, by the 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

Anandavadi Primary Agrl Coop Credit Society Limited R777, Sendurai vs. Income Tax Officer, Perambalur

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

ITA 2320/CHNY/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2320/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Anandavadi Primary Agril. Co-Op. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Credit Society Limited R777, Chinna Perambalur. Anandavadi, Sendurai, Ariyalur 621718, Perambalur, Tamil Nadu [Pan: Aatfa1893N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.07.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Any Adjournment Petition Filed, But, However, Filed An Application Seeking Permission To File Additional

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 29.03.2024 was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO), contrary to the mandatory procedure under the Faceless Assessment Scheme and as held by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in its common

Perrumal Alagesan, Salem vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Salem

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

ITA 2123/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. Lakshmi-For Respondent: Mr.Saujanya Ranjan, IRS
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

assessee inter alia has challenged the validity of the reopening notice issued u/s.148 of the Act by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) as required to be done by the CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022. The Ld. AR for the assessee referred to notice u/s.148 ... 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

Jain Textile Industries, Gurgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed as devoid of

ITA 932/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Jain Textile Industries, V Assistant Commissioner Of 38, Milestone, Behrampur S Income Tax, Circle-1(1) Road, Village Khandsa, Hsiiddc Building, 4Th Floor, Gurgaon, Haryana Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon Pan: Aabfj8405F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Bhupender Jit Kumar, Adv, Sh. Nikhil Sharma, Adv & Sh. Tushar Kalra, Adv Revenue By Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 251(1)(a)

Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”) upholding the validity of assumption of jurisdiction under by the Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “AO”) under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) in the case

Juniper Networks Solution India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, NFAC Itd, New Delhi

In the result, ground no 3 raised by the assessee is allowed in its favour

ITA 4400/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Juniper Networks Solution India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assessment Unit, Unit No.Iia, 06Th Floor, Dlf Centre, Nfac Itd, Parliament Street, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aaecj1345A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. Advocate Shri Sandeep Bhalla, Advocate Shri Anurag Singhal, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 Date Of Order : 24.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessees Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.07.2024 Passed By The Income Tax Department, Assessment Unit U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)/144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

working capital adjustment, assessee filed the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, National Faceless Assessment Centre- Assessment Unit- Income Tax Department ('the Ld. AO') erred in assessing the income of the Appellant at Rs.66,65,91,054 as against returned

Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward 1, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 144/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh Ito, Ward 1, Nr Goraba Takies Jamkhed, Vs. Ahmednagar Ahmednagar – 413201 Pan: Hozps1445M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas P Bora Department By : Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-10-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69A

renders the proceedings invalid, violating mandatory statutory requirements. c) Non-compliance with the procedural mandates of Section 144B of the Act, which governs the faceless assessment process. 4 d) The reopening of the assessment was based on presumption and surmises, reflecting borrowed satisfaction by the Ld. AO. e) Mere cash

Annai Kanthammal Ramachandran Educational and Charitable Trust, Krishnagiri vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Salem

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1987/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri. G. Reddi Prakash, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

both issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Salem. Thereafter, the assessment is completed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, by making an addition of Rs.1,50,05,659/- as undisclosed business income and a demand of Rs.1,10,00,242/- was raised. Aggrieved, the assessee ... erroneous, since it makes no difference to the validity of the reopening notice, whether it is the jurisdictional Assessing Officer or the National Faceless Assessment Centre and prayed that the appeal be dismissed. She further relied upon para 8 of the order the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court

Dress Code, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1650/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for the Revenue
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234ASection 234BSection 69C

order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, Page 2 of 9 1961 [the Act] dated 24.9.2021 by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [ld. AO] was dismissed. 2. The assessee is in appeal raising the following grounds of appeal:- “General Ground 1. The learned Income