← 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

Jain Brothers, Aram Nagar Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Income Tax Department, Civic Centre, New Delhi

ITA 5251/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2018-19 Jain Brothers, Vs. Nfac, New Delhi 7359, Aram Nagar, Civic Centre, New Delhi Delhi – 110 055 (Pan:- Aabfj1838Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Deepak Kumar Jain (Assessee) Respondent By : Shri Ashok Kumar Pandey, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Kumar Jain (Assessee)For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Pandey, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69C

emanating from the order of the NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079073796(1) dated 30.7.2025. Assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer of National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi u/s. 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) for the assessment year

Dipak Chhaganlal Naik L/H Amitaben Dipak Naik, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 1118/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1118/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Dipak Chhaganlal Naik Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3)(1), बनाम/ L/H Amitaben Dipak Naik Surat, Room No. 627, Aaykar Vs. 44, China Gate-2, B/Hgayatri Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395 Mandir, Althan S.O, Althan, 001 Surat- 395 017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadhn 5872 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, Ar राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/10/2025

Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 2(47)Section 250Section 50CSection 80C

without appreciating the fact that……… (i) Notice and proceedings carried out u/s.148 are in utter violation of the prescribed procedure of faceless assessment. (ii) Notice issued by ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat on 27.07.2022 and not by FAO; ITA No.1118/Srt/2024 A.Y 13-14 Dipak C. Naik/L/h Amitaben D Naik ... assessee before the Tribunal pertain to jurisdictional issues, including limitation under amended Section 148 and violations of CBDT Instructions regarding DIN and faceless assessment procedure. These must be adjudicated on merits by the CIT(A) after giving opportunity to the legal heir. 8.3 In view of the above facts

DCIT, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. The Estate Investment Company Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

3012/Mum/2025

ITA 3936/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
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 of Section 151A ... 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

DCIT, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. The Estate Investment Company Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3928/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
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 of Section 151A ... 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

The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3228/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
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 of Section 151A ... 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

The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 8(1), Mumbai

3012/Mum/2025

ITA 3227/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

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 The Estate Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. and others (i) The AR also pointed out that the notice under section 148 was issued ... 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

The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3225/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2019-20
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 33 ITA No.3012/Mum/2025 and others The Estate Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. and others (i) The AR also pointed out that the notice under ... 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

The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 8(1), Mumbai

3012/Mum/2025

ITA 3224/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
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 33 ITA No.3012/Mum/2025 and others The Estate Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. and others (i) The AR also pointed out that the notice under ... 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

The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

3012/Mum/2025

ITA 3223/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2021-22
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 33 ITA No.3012/Mum/2025 and others The Estate Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. and others (i) The AR also pointed out that the notice under ... 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

The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

3012/Mum/2025

ITA 3222/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2022-23
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 of Section 151A ... 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

DCIT Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai

3012/Mum/2025

ITA 3087/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
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 of Section 151A ... 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

The Estate Investment Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3012/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
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 33 ITA No.3012/Mum/2025 and others The Estate Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. and others (i) The AR also pointed out that the notice under ... 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

Central Bank of India, Mumbai vs. NFAC, CIT(Appeal), Delhi

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

ITA 2045/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, (CIT DR)
Section 115JSection 129Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 52

shot, ‘the Act) for the Assessment Year 2016- 17, date of order 24/06/2022. The impugned order was emanated from the order of National Faceless Assessment Centre(NFAC), Delhi (in short, ‘the Ld.AO’) passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, date of order dated 20/03/2022. 2. We heard the rival

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-49(1), New Delhi vs. Gulshan Rai Mahajan, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4967/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2020-21 Assistant Commissioner Of Gulshan Rai Mahajan, Vs. Income Tax, Circle 49(1), B-39, Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi. Mayapuri, Delhi-1100 64 Pan :Aafpm2398Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the Revenue is against order dated 27.08.2024 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

Deepak Kumar Gupta, Kanpur vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Moradabad

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

ITA 4528/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Deepak Kumar Gupta, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 7/115, Flat No. B-1, Sai Niwas, Ward 2(1), Arya Nagar, Kanpur - 208020 Moradabad ( U.P) Uttar Pradesh. Pin: 244 001 Pan :Acmpg1836E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69

VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is against order dated 20.08.2024 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

Balwinder Kaur, Moga vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Moga

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 593/ASR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Oct 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 593/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Ms. Balwinder Kaur Ito- बनाम/ Patti Machhiki Machhike, Ward-1 Machhike Nihal Singh Wala, Moga-142039 Vs. Moga-142039, Punjab Punjab "ायी लेखा सं./Pan. Gzwpk-8896-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri Manoj Kumar (Ca) - Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

derogation of the provisions of Sec.151A read with CBDT Notification No.18/2022 dated 29-03-2022 which mandate issuance of such notice by Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) only. The Ld. AR asserted that in terms of ratio of various decisions of jurisdictional High Court, issuance of notice u/s 148 by Jurisdictional ... Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) would vitiate the assessment proceedings. The Ld. AR referred to notice issued by Ld. AO u/s 148 on 29-03-2023 which is kept on Page No.58 of the paper-book. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed admission of any such ground

Seth Industrial Corporation, Ludhiana, Punjab vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Ludhiana, Punjab

Appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 874/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1044/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit-Central Circle-3 M/S Seth Industrial Corporation बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar 80-A, Industrial Estate Vs. Ludhiana – 141001 Ludhiana, Punjab - 141003 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs-2622-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.874/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Seth Industrial Corporation Dcit-Central Circle-3 बनाम/ 80-A, Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Vs. Ludhiana, Punjab - 141003 Ludhiana – 141001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs-2622-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Smt. Geetinder Mann (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana [Cit(A)] Dated 18-07-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 132(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69

derogation of the provisions of Sec.151A read with CBDT Notification No.18/2022 dated 29-03-2022 which mandate issuance of such notice by Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) only. The Ld. AR asserted that in terms of ratio of various decisions of jurisdictional High Court, issuance of notice u/s 148 by Jurisdictional ... Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) would vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. The Ld. AR referred to notice issued by Ld. AO u/s 148 on 06-04-2022 which is kept on Page No.65 of the paper-book. This notice has been issued by Tarun Sharda, DCIT

DCIT, CC-3, Ludhiana, Kitchlu Nagar vs. Seth Industrial Corporation, Millerganj

Appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1044/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1044/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit-Central Circle-3 M/S Seth Industrial Corporation बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar 80-A, Industrial Estate Vs. Ludhiana – 141001 Ludhiana, Punjab - 141003 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs-2622-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.874/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Seth Industrial Corporation Dcit-Central Circle-3 बनाम/ 80-A, Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Vs. Ludhiana, Punjab - 141003 Ludhiana – 141001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfs-2622-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Smt. Geetinder Mann (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana [Cit(A)] Dated 18-07-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 132(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69

derogation of the provisions of Sec.151A read with CBDT Notification No.18/2022 dated 29-03-2022 which mandate issuance of such notice by Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) only. The Ld. AR asserted that in terms of ratio of various decisions of jurisdictional High Court, issuance of notice u/s 148 by Jurisdictional ... Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) would vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. The Ld. AR referred to notice issued by Ld. AO u/s 148 on 06-04-2022 which is kept on Page No.65 of the paper-book. This notice has been issued by Tarun Sharda, DCIT

Sneha Pawan Agarwal, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1369/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

parte assessment orders dated 28.03.2022 passed by the Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer or AO”], under section 147 read with section 144 and section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred

Sneha Pawan Agarwal, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1368/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

parte assessment orders dated 28.03.2022 passed by the Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer or AO”], under section 147 read with section 144 and section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred