“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

Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Patna vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Patna

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

ITA 362/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: the Assessing Officer to the notices issued by him. It is seen that even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not make any worthwhile presentation except that written submissions were filed in which it was mentioned that compliance could not be made before the Ld. Assessing Officer because a number of staff were suffering from COVID and hence were not alert enough to make proper representation before the Revenue Authorities. However, going by the fact that even before the Ld. CIT(A) ther

Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 271

Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Limited, 4th Floor, BSBCCL, Shastri Nagar, Patna - 800023 [PAN: AAECB3969N] .....................…...…………….... Appellant vs. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ...........…..…..................... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : None Department represented by : Ashok Kumar, CIT Date of concluding the hearing : 31.12.2024 Date of pronouncing ... Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Bihar Medical Services and Infrastructure Corporation Limited 2. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 3. 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR) //// By order

Cyient Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above observation

ITA 913/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.913/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Ankit Jain Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Agwpa4459K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A(1)Section 292CSection 69

ground as under vide letter dated 24.09.2025 : “3. Since the notice u/s 148 was issued by the jurisdiction Assessing Officer and not in the faceless assessment manner, the proceedings u/s 147 are bad in law and further proceedings are equally bad in law”. Page ... well as the order under section 148A(d) of the Act were issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (“JAO”) instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer (“FAO”), which is contrary to the scheme of Page 3 of 28 ITA No 913 of 2025 Ankit Jain Hyderabad faceless reassessment introduced

Krishan Dev Verma, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward - 1, Bhiwani

ITA 1147/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR

Section 14Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 238Section 30(4)Section 31

SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITAs No.1147, 1149 & 1148/Del/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Jasrati Education Solutions Ltd., Vs National Faceless Assessment 514, Udyog Vihar Phase-III, Centre, Gurgaon, Delhi.. Haryana – 122 001. PAN: AAACP1698Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate & Shri Rahul Prabhakar ... r.w.s. 144B and u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively, by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. Heard and perused the record. It comes up on hearing both the sides that

Arvind Shashank HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 460/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 210Section 234ASection 271(1)Section 271F

erred in law while not issuing of Notice u/s.148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and therefore assessment order passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi making heavy addition u/s.69A r.w.s.115BBEof Rs.5,97,074/- is bad in law, illegal and void. 04. That the Ld. CIT(A) has breach the basic

The Venginissery Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Thrissur

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

ITA 443/COCH/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Jan 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Vipin K., CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 15.4.2021 by the ITA Nos.443 & 444/COCH/2024 Page 2 of 8 National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (NaFAC) [ld. AO] was partly allowed. 2. The assessee is before us raising the following grounds of appeal wherein it is contended

Vitp Private Limited (in the Case of Flagship Developers Private Limited), Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 572/HYD/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.572/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vitp Private Ltd (In The Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Case Of Flagship Income Tax, Circle 8(1) Developers (P) (Ltd) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaccv2672G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Tanmayee Rajkumar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 02/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263

higher authorities, wherein it has been stated that in view of the Covid-19 pandemic and the data driven assessment scheme of the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019, the assessment has to be 1imited to the discrepancies as red flagged for enquiry and investigation through CASS and to legacy issues

Ektalis Gam Patidar Development Foundation, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1867/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 272A(1)(d)Section 273B

Trust, the assessment was reopened by issuing u/s. 148 notice. The assessee has not responded to the notice and the case was transferred to Faceless assessment. The assessee failed to comply to the notice issued u/s. 142(1) dated 06-02-2022 which has resulted in passing an exparte assessment

Msc Agency (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 929/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 37(1)

learned Assessing Officer (AO) erred in making the disallowances/additions in the assessment order without issuing a draft order as required under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019, 2. Ground no. 2: 2.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC erred in remanding

Msc Agency (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 928/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 37(1)

Msc Agency (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 927/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 37(1)

Bahadur Singh, Zirakpur Punjab vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department Delhi

In the result, the matter is set-aside to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee

ITA 577/CHANDI/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Spandeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT, DR (Virtual)

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

response to the notice, the assessee filed its return of income on 23/02/2022. The case of the assessee was transferred to NFAC under faceless assessment scheme and notices under section 142(1) was issued followed by the reminder on 07/02/2022 and 16/02/2022 and thereafter, a final show cause along with

Uber India Systems Private Limited (As Successor to Uber India Research and Development Private Limited), Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 581/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D MistriFor Respondent: : Ms. M.Narmada, CIT-DR

Section 144B(1)Section 144C(13)Section 92D

Total Income 1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned National Faceless Assessment Centre ('NFAC') / Assessing Officer ('AO') / Transfer Pricing Officer ('TPO') erred, and the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP') further erred in making an addition

Dharmesh Jitendra Sheth, Girgaon Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Assessment Unit, Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4919/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dharmesh Jitendra Sheth, Income Tax Officer Assessment Unit, 5Th Floor, Tilak Mandir, 406/408, Ward 19(1)(1), V.P. Road, Congress House, Girgaon, Vs. Piramal Chamber, Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Auaps 7658 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Kirit SanghviFor Respondent: 19/12/2024

Section 148Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SUNIL

Atiq Ahmed, Hapur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(4), Hapur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3676/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.3675 & 3676/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14& 2014-15 बनाम Atiq Ahmed Income Tax Officer, House No.333, Bhamda Patti, Vs. Ward-2(3)(4), Pattharwalakaun, Aaykarbhawan, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh. Teachers Colony, Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aifpa8796G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi in Appeal Nos. NFAC/2012-13/10127954 and NFAC/2013-14/10147813 vide order of even dated 19.06.2024. Assessments were framed by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the 1 I.T.A. Nos. 3675 & 3676/Del/2024 Income

Atiq Ahmed, Hapur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(4), Hapur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3675/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

Pradip Manilal Kanakia, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Mum-C-(174)(1)), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 5499/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri.B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Kirti SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (SR DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(x)

brevity the “Act”), date of order 09/09/2024 for Assessment year 2018-19. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (for 2 ITA5761/Mum/2023 Amar Anil Turathia, Mumbai brevity the “Ld. AO”)order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B

Kondasamy Kanagaraj, Tiruppur vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Tiruppur

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

ITA 2724/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2724/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Ms. Lavanya, F.C.A HIFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 250(6)Section 69Section 69C

Nathakkadu Thottam, Vs. Ward-2(3), Veerapandi (PO), Tiruppur / Tiruppur – 641 605. TheAddl./Joint/Deputy/Asst. [PAN: AHCPK 0297N] Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथF की ओर से/ Appellant by : Ms. Lavanya, F.C.A HIथF की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Anitha, Addl

Amar Anil Turakhia, Mumbai vs. Ward 24(1)(1), Piramal Chambers

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 5761/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri.B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Kirti SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (SR DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(x)

Deejay Stocks Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4761/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Smt Renu Jauhri[Assessment Year: 2014-15] & [Assessment Year: 2016-17] Deejay Stocks Dcit 4(2)(1) Private Limited Erstwhile Dcit 401, Shangrilla Apt., 12(2)(2), L. T. Road, Aayakar Bhava, Borivali (West), Vs. Maharishi Karve Mumbai- 400092. Road, Pan: Aadc6404H Mumbai- 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

order to file responses to the notice received u/s 148 of the Act and subsequent notices issued u/s 142(1). The Ld.AO in Faceless assessment passed order u/s.147 & u/s.144 r.w.s.143(3) dated 17.03.2022 making addition in the hands of the assessee. 2.3. It is submitted that, on receiving call from

Deejay Stocks Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4760/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)