“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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sri. Narayanappa Muthuraju, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2301/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 271ASection 69ASection 69C

wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the penalty order passed u/s. 271AAC(1) of the Act dated 4.8.2021 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi was dismissed. Therefore, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “ 1. The penalty order passed u/s.271AAC

Sri. Narayanappa Muthuraju, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2300/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 271ASection 69ASection 69C

S.K. Ventures, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2), Kalyan

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1839/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 80

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.PCIT the assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal. 2.4 Meanwhile, amidst COVID-19 in the National Faceless Assessment Centre effect to the order passed u/s.263 of the Act. The Ld.AO sought for issued notice under section 142(1) in the order giving details regarding ... Ventures conditions for claiming deduction u/s. VI-A. Due to ongoing covid-19, the assessee could not respond to the notices issued by National Faceless Assessment Centre. 2.5 On 13/09/2021, the National Faceless Assessment Centre passed Assessment Order under section 144 read with section 263, of the Act. Aggrieved

Chhaya Devi, Muzaffarpur vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 437/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 437/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Chhaya Devi,………….…………………….………Appellant New Area Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aakpd7640M] -Vs.- National Faceless Assessment Centre (Nfac)…………………………………………….....Respondent New Delhi Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 10ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)

Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 437/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Chhaya Devi,………….…………………….………Appellant New Area Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [PAN:AAKPD7640M] -Vs.- National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC)…………………………………………….....Respondent New Delhi Appearances by: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared ... Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 29th day of April, 2025 Copies to :(1) Chhaya Devi, New Area Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar (2) National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), New Delhi (3) CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi; 4) CIT - ; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard FileBy order

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Monarch Networth Capital Limited, Mumbai

ITA 962/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shrti Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

revenue is in appeals against the deletion of additions under section 69A of the Act made by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, [hereinafter referred to as “ Assessing Officer” ], and the assessee has filed cross-objections challenging the validity of re-assessment. Since the issues involved in all three assessment years

Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Monarch Networth Capital Limited, Mumbai

ITA 961/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shrti Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Manish Ranjan, Deputy Commissioner of Income -Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Monarch Networth Capital Limited, Mumbai

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue for A.Y. 2015–16 is dismissed

ITA 960/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shrti Bandish Soparkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

revenue is in appeals against the deletion of additions under section 69A of the Act made by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer”], and the assessee has filed cross-objections challenging the validity of re-assessment. Since the issues involved in all three assessment years

Surendra Mangaldas Shah, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2035/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2013-14 Surendra Mangaldas Shah, Huf The Dcit, Cir.2(1)(1) G/7, Amola Chambers Vs Ahmedabad. Cg Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aachs 6590 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate Assessee By : Adjournment Application Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/04/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Adjournment Application

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

hereinafter referred to as "the Act"], for the Assessment Year 2013-14, arising from the reassessment order dated 26.03.2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "Assessing Officer"], under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act. 2 Facts of the Case

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Jyothy Labs Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals bearing ITA Nos 515 & 516/Mum/2025 filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 516/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Ms.Priyanka Jain a/wFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali (SR DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 274Section 80

Labs Limited Act’)date of order 27/11/2024 for A.Ys. 2017-18& 2018-19. The impugned orders were emanated from the orders of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short, the “Ld.AO”) date of orders dated 23/03/2022 passed under section 270A of the Act. 2. Both the appeals have same

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Jyothy Labs Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals bearing ITA Nos 515 & 516/Mum/2025 filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 515/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Ms.Priyanka Jain a/wFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali (SR DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 274Section 80

Pramukh Aranya Developers, Junagadh vs. Pr. CIT, Rajkot-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 372/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.372 /Rjt/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: (2018-19) M/S. Pramukh Aranya Developers Office No. 5, First Floor, Cit Centre, Opp. New Collector Officer, B/H. Sardar Baug, Junagadh - 362001 The Pr. Cit-1, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot - 360001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaofp3393F (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Appellant By राजस्व की प्रत्यर्थी ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: : 04/02/2025 : 28/04/2025 आदेश / Order By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Dated 30.03.2024, Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income- Tax (In Short “Ld Pcit"), Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'), For The Assessment Year2018-19.Grievances Raised By The Assessee, Which, Being Interconnected, Will Be Taken Up Together, Are As Follows: M/S. Pramukh Aranya Developers V. Pcit

For Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23(5)Section 263

seeks to eliminate the human interface between the taxpayer and the income tax department. The scheme lays down the procedure to carry out a faceless assessment through electronic mode. From 13th August 2020, the e-assessment scheme of 2019 stands amended and hence known as the Faceless Assessment Scheme. Briefly

Lalita Devi Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1410/JPR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1410/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Lalita Devi Sharma Murlidhar Sharma Dhani Vs. Harsaura, Baskhoh, Jaipur Baskho, Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: HCPPS 0547 Q प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hear

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

challenged the assessment order dated 06.09.2022 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short “Act”] by National Faceless assessment Unit [ for short AO]. 2 Lalita Devi Sharma vs. ITO 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. The Ld.CIT

Royal Canin India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai

Appeal is hereby dismissed

ITA 6816/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shrivikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeroyal Canin India Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income- 1401 & 1402, F Wing, 14Th Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Floor, Lotus Corporate Park, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Cts No.185/A, Graham Firth Mumbai-400 020 Compound, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400 063 Pan: Aadcr4417J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: ShriK.M. Gupta a/w Shri AnmolFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar (CIT DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)

case, and in law, the impugned Assessment Order dated 22 October 2024 passed by the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment centre. Mumbai or the Learned Assessing Officer ('Ld. AO"), under section 143(3) r.w.s. 1440(13) of the Income

Mr Rahat Mohammed Riyazuddin Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5291/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, Advocate and Shri Akshay Pawar, ARFor Respondent: R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151(1)Section 50CSection 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068050024(1). dated 28.08.2024, passed against the assessment order by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 18.05.2023, for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2 Rahat Mohammed

Rajendra Bhalchandra Mokashi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 27(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5154/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ajeet Manwani, AdvocateFor Respondent: R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068355466(1). dated 05.09.2024, passed against the assessment order by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 29.03.2022, for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds taken

Parth Dinesh Patel, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Patan

In the result, for the reasons set out hereinabove the orders of the

ITA 138/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68

reassessment orders framed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act"], by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "Assessing Officer /AO"] for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2015-16 and 2016-17, respectively. As the issues involved

Parth Dinesh Patel, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Patan

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 137/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.137/Ahd/2024 & 138/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Parth Dinesh Patel The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 18/19, Utkarsh Society Ward-1, V/S. Opp. Market Yard Patan – 384 265 Tal. Visnagar, Mehsana Gujarat – 384 315 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bwrpp 7811 A (अपीलाथ&/ Appellant) ('( यथ&/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 01.12.2023 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Arising Out Of Reassessment Orders Framed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], By The National Faceless Assessment Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Assessing Officer /Ao”] For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2015–16 & 2016–17, Respectively. As The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68

reassessment orders framed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer /AO”] for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2015–16 and 2016–17, respectively. As the issues involved

Malpur Taluka Primary Teachers Sahkari Sakh & Grahak Sahkari Mandli, Malpur vs. The ACIT., Himatnagar Circle, Himatnagar

ITA 820/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarassessment Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia, A.R. &For Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr-D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(19)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

procedure laid down u/s I.T.A No. 820/Ahd/2023 Malpur Taluka Primery Teachers’ Sahkari Sakh & Grahak Sahkari Mandali , A.Y. 2014-15 144B read with the National Faceless Assessment Scheme which is mandatory. 1.1 The Ld. NFAC has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not considering fully & properly the written

Rais Nasir Shekh, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad

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

ITA 257/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.257/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

notice that the assessee has not taken note of the e-mail 3 Rais Nasir Shekh received from NFAC. Since new procedures of faceless assessments and faceless appeals have been introduced some assessees are not well versed with the new technological advancements. We would like to quote the judgment

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Circle, Panchkula vs. Estate Officer, Huda Panchkula, Panchkula

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, and the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee in those appeals are also dismissed

ITA 221/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Jindal & Ms. Rattan Kaur, C.A’sFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)

Section 148

served on the assessee. Thereafter notices u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act were issued from time to time by the Assessing Officer/National Faceless Assessment Centre which were also uploaded on the portal and not served on the assessee except the notice dated 14.02.2022, which was duly complied with ... issuance of notice u/s 148 dated 30.03.2021 by the Assessing Officer. Thereafter notices u/s 142(1) were issued on 02.11.2021 & 20.11.2021 by AO and Faceless Assessment Centre respectively which were also not served on the assessee. In the first week of February'2022, the Assessing Officer contacted the counsel