← 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

Devendra Kumar, Noida vs. Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 5784/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Davendra Kumar, Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Vs. H. No. 52, Vill. Barola, Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sector 49, Noida, U.P. Delhi Pin: 201 301 Pan: Caipk0485M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 57

VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal by the assessee is against order dated 12.07.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising out of order dated ... National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred as “Ld. AO) under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act passed for assessment year 2016-17. 2 ITA No. 5784/Del./2024 2. Brief facts of case are that as per information, the assessee had received interest of Rs.58

Ayodhya Singh, Jamshedpur vs. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Ranchi

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

ITA 366/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No. 366/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Ayodhya Singh,……..……………………………..Appellant G-1 & 2, Gangotri House, 1 Number Sura Bhawan Area, South Park, Bistupur-831001, Jharkhand [Pan:Fdjps1783K] -Vs.- Assessment Unit,……………………………..…...Respondent National Faceless Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan, 5A, Main Road, Besides Ranchi Club Ltd., Ranchi, Jharkhand Appearances By: Shri P.S. Paul, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 21, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 10Section 115BSection 142Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Singh,……..……………………………..Appellant G-1 & 2, Gangotri House, 1 Number Sura Bhawan Area, South Park, Bistupur-831001, Jharkhand [PAN:FDJPS1783K] -Vs.- Assessment Unit,……………………………..…...Respondent National Faceless Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan, 5A, Main Road, Besides Ranchi Club Ltd., Ranchi, Jharkhand Appearances by: Shri P.S. Paul, A.R., appeared on behalf ... Copies to :(1) Ayodhya Singh, G-1 & 2, Gangotri House, 1 Number Sura Bhawan Area, South Park, Bistupur-831001, Jharkhand (2) Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan, 5A, Main Road, Besides Ranchi Club Ltd., Ranchi, Jharkhand (3) CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

Asian Sports, Patiala vs. ITO, Patiala

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), Who Has Since Sustained The Order Of The Ao.

For Appellant: Shri Deepinder Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

relief be granted to the assessee firm. 7. Per contra, the Ld. DR has been heard who has relied on the order of the Faceless Assessment Unit as well as of that of the Ld CIT(A). 8. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available

Comfort Cool Systems, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 689/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.689/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Comfort Cool Systems Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 1(1) Pan:Aaffc0969D Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Shashank Dundu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22/08/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Shashank Dundu, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 250

under: “The present appeal arises from the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B dated 29.09.2021 of the Income Tax Act (‘the Act’) by NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI for the A.Y. 2010-11. The appeal in this case has been filed on 29.10.2021 as mentioned in form no. 35. Notices

Chahida Begam, Puducherry vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Puducherry Range, Income Tax Office, Puducherry

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1219/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Mr.Hithesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

What is covered in clause 3(a) of the Scheme is already provided in Section 144B(1) of the Act, which Section provides for faceless assessment, and covers assessment, reassessment or recomputation under Section 147 of the Act. Therefore, if Revenue's arguments are to be accepted, there ... purpose of framing a Scheme only for clause 3(a) which is in any event already covered under faceless assessment regime in Section 144B of the Act. The argument of respondent, therefore, renders the whole Scheme redundant. An argument which renders the whole Scheme otiose cannot be accepted as correct

Manickam Chettiar Velmurugan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncc-19(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1166/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Mr.Hithesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

dated 25.07.2022, despite lacking jurisdiction under the faceless reassessment regime prescribed under Section 151A, which mandates that such notices be issued only by the Faceless Assessing Officer? 2. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer are void ab initio, having been commenced without authority ... What is covered in clause 3(a) of the Scheme is already provided in Section 144B(1) of the Act, which Section provides for faceless assessment, and covers assessment, reassessment or recomputation under Section 147 of the Act. Therefore, if Revenue's arguments are to be accepted, there

Manickam Chettiar Velmurugan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncc-19(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1165/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Mr.Hithesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

dated 25.07.2022, despite lacking jurisdiction under the faceless reassessment regime prescribed under Section 151A, which mandates that such notices be issued only by the Faceless Assessing Officer? 2. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer are void ab initio, having been commenced without authority ... What is covered in clause 3(a) of the Scheme is already provided in Section 144B(1) of the Act, which Section provides for faceless assessment, and covers assessment, reassessment or recomputation under Section 147 of the Act. Therefore, if Revenue's arguments are to be accepted, there

Bharat Nathalal Zaveri, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 4(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4486/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bharat Nathalal Zaveri, Ito-Mum-W(443)(1), 411, Kewal Indl. Estate, Senapati Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Vs. Karve, Road, New Marine Mumbai-400013. Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaapz 0864 D Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Bharat Zaveri
Section 142(1)Section 148

NFAC 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon. NFAC has erred in ignoring the fact that Faceless Assessment Unit had not has erred in ignoring the fact that Faceless Assessment Unit had not has erred in ignoring the fact that Faceless Assessment Unit ... NFAC 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon. NFAC has erred in ignoring the fact that Faceless Assessment Unit had has erred in ignoring the fact that Faceless Assessment Unit had has erred in ignoring the fact that Faceless Assessment Unit had erred

Mahant Pandey, Rohtas vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

with regard to issue of notice u/s 143(2). 14. As per the recent judgement in the case of Mantra Industries Limited Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC or NEAC) & Ors. (Bombay High Court) the Assessment orders passed without application of mind liable to be set aside and invite substantial

Mahant Pandey, Rohtas vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 181/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

with regard to issue of notice u/s 143(2). 14. As per the recent judgement in the case of Mantra Industries Limited Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC or NEAC) & Ors. (Bombay High Court) the Assessment orders passed without application of mind liable to be set aside and invite substantial

Aamya Resources LLP, Andheri East vs. ITO, Ward 24(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 4423/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kantvs. Ito, Ward 24(1)(1) Aamya Resources Llp Piramal Chamber, 1, Wilson House, Old Mumbai – 400012. Nagardas Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400069. Pan/Gir No. Abcfa4651A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Satish Aggarwal (Virtually Appear) Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 11.10.2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre / Cit(A), Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2. Although, Assessee Had Raised Number Of Grounds In The Present Appeal But At The Outset Ld. Ar Pressed Ground No.4 Which Is Legal In Question & It Goes To The Roots Of The Case. Therefore, We Have Decided To Adjudicate This Ground Firstly, Ground No. 4, Which Is Reproduced Herein Below:

Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250Section 3(1)

taken; approval granted by Principal Commissioner could not be termed as valid/legal approval. 7 Aamya Resources LLP, Mumbai (iii) Aakruti Ketan Mehta Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, [[2025] 173 taxmann.com 265 (Mumbai - Trib.) (Copy of Judgement enclosed in paper Book at page no. 54-59) Where notice under section ... ACIT [2025] 173 taxmann.com 182 (Mumbai - Trib.) 4. DCIT Vs. SS Jewellery [2025] 173 taxmann.com 189 (Mumbai - Trib.) 5. Aakruti Ketan Mehta Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, [[2025] 173 taxmann.com 265 (Mumbai - Trib.) 9 Aamya Resources LLP, Mumbai 6. Cipla Pharma and Life Sciences Ltd. vs DCIT [2024] 164 taxmann.com

Hans Raj, Palwal vs. Income Tax Office Ward 1(3), Faridabad

In the result, the applicant/assessee is allowed to withdraw

ITA 2931/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Hans Raj, Vs. Ito, B1/R, Near Sanatan Dharam Ward-1(3), Mandir, New Colony, Palwal Faridabad Pin: 121 102 (Haryana) Pan :Agbpr4470N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 250

VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal by the assessee is against order dated 31.07.2019 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Faridabad under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising out of assessment order dated

Moizuddin Naimuddin Shaikh, Latur vs. ITO Ward 1 Latur, Latur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 1263/PUN/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Aug 2025AY 2012-2013
For Respondent: Shri Girish Ladda
Section 144Section 250

सत्यमेव जयते आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण" एस एम सी "न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "SMC" BENCH, PUNE

Tyspl 100 Andimadam Paccs Limited, Andimadam vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1428/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1428/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Tyspl 100 Andimadam Paccs Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-1, Udiyarpalayam, Ariyalur, Kumbakonam. Perambalur, Tamil Nadu-621 801. [Pan: Aacat7731L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : G.Reddi Prakash, C.A प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Krishna Kumar Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: G.Reddi Prakash, C.AFor Respondent: Mr.Krishna Kumar JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

151A of the Act r.w. notification dated 29.03.2022 of Central Board of Direct Taxes, reassessment notice u/s 148 was to be issued by the faceless assessing officer and that issuance of the same by the jurisdictional assessing officer u/s 148 dated 31.03.2023 was unwarranted and not in conformity with statutory ... dated 29th March 2022 issued by the Page - 2 - of 9 Central Board of Direct Taxes, reassessment u/s 148 can be issued by a faceless assessing officer only. It was urged that in the present case as the notice u/s 148 dated 31.03.2023 was issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer

Thermo Fisher Scientific India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per our aforesaid

ITA 2847/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2847/Mum/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2020-21 Thermo Fisher Scientific India Private Limited 403-404, Delphil B Wing, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai Iit, Mumbai-400 076 Pan : Aabct3207A ........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-15(3)(1), Mumbai ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vipul Soni Revenue By : Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :14.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 20.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Vipul SoniFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 32(1)Section 80G

A.Y.2020-21 on 15.02.2021 declaring total income at Rs.69,66,69,630/-. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under the faceless assessment regime wherein the assessment unit had passed the assessment order dated 26.09.2022 u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act'), assessing

Sunil Kumar, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Faridabad

ITA 957/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Kumar Misra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr
Section 142(1)Section 147

order dated 15.09.2021 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. Heard and perused the record. The issue arises out of addition ... consideration was received towards the transfer of property. Same are also relied before us. The assessment was framed ex parte by the National Faceless Assessment Centre vide order dated 15.09.2021 and ld. ClT(Appeals) sustained the addition of Rs.1,40,00,0000/- holding that: “5.1.2…… the claim of the assessee

Atar Singh, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 70 (1)-Delhi, Delhi

ITA 186/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Mr. R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 282Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

raised the following additional grounds of appeal :- 1. That on facts, and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (NFAC-Delhi) erred in having assumed jurisdiction u/s.151A r.w.s 1448 of the I.T Act, 1961 from 13/12/2021 by issuing notice u/s.142 ... conducting faceless assessment prior to issuance of notification u/s.151A, dated 29/03/2022 for operation of faceless assessment, accordingly the reassessment order dated 26/03/2022 passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B passed by the NFAC, Delhi in violation of the provisions of section 151A r.w.s 144B may kindly be held as null & void

Samta Mittal, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1391/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2018-19 Samta Mittal Vs. Ito 601, Royal Retreat, New Delhi Surajkund, Faridabad Pan No. Agzpm5730G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 144Section 234ASection 251(1)(a)Section 69A

applying prescribed procedure as per Act and rules made thereunder. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, 6 the Faceless Assessment Unit has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C, 234D. 7. That the appellant craves the leave

Microad India Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle - 16(2), Delhi

Appeals is allowed

ITA 4714/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Khanna, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 165Section 195Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

/Del/2024 Microad India Pvt. Ltd. passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ld. AO) for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. On hearing both the sides, we find that

Abbobacker Siddieque, Malappuram vs. ITO, Ward 1& Tps, Tirur

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

ITA 537/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Aboobacker Siddieque .......... Appellant Kundupuzhakkal House, Cherur Post Malappuram 676304 [Pan: Dzaps6853P] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-1 & Tps, Tirur .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Shaji Paulose, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Neethu, S., Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Shaji Paulose, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neethu, S., Sr. DR
Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)Section 69C

information that the appellant made cash deposit, in bank account aggregating to Rs. 2 Aboobacker Siddieque 1,15,72,700/- the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter called "the AO") issued a notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 24.03.2021. The appellant neither complied with the notice issued