“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

Iyajool, Noida vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(1)(5), Gautambudh Nagar

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

ITA 1857/DEL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 10(37)Section 144Section 234ASection 28

delay in filing of the appeal. The assessee is an illiterate person and his explanation that he was not familiar with the scheme of faceless assessment and therefore there was a delay in filing the appeal, appears to be bona fide and reasonable. Considering these facts, we hereby condone

Nirmal Singh, Ayodhya vs. ITO Ward-1, Faizabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 83/LKW/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria & Sa. No. 07/Lkw/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita. No.83/Lkw/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Nirmal Singh The Income Tax Officer, V. 15/2/16, Janki Ghat, Ayodhya- Ward-1, 224123, Faizabad (Up). Cinema Road, Faizabad- New-224001. Pan:Bdsps4165C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri. Rakesh Garg, Adv Respondent By: Shri. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 24 09 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10 10 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

original return income of filed. The notice us 143(2) was issued on 27.10 2021.....Thereafter, the case was assigned to the National Faceless Assessment Centre(NFAC) on 11.11.2021 under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019.....” The objection of the Ld. A R on the issue of notice ... NFAC, makes the order passed by NFAC © and without jurisdiction. > The reason for this, itself has been laid down in the procedure for Faceless Assessment (copy attached). It states as to how an assessee would come to know that his case has been picked up for faceless e- assessment

Mohan Shriniwas Bhise, Sangli vs. ITO Ward 3, Sangli

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes with the above directions

ITA 900/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amol R. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 10Section 10(10)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 69

facts in confirming the assessed income of the appellant to the tune of Rs.69,99,930 thereby partially sustaining the additions made by National Faceless Assessment Centre. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the fact that, the appellant was a Government employee

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 454/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

r.w.s 147 & 147 rws 144B of the 2 DCIT vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya Income Tax Act, by ITO, Ward 1 (2) and the National Faceless Assessment Unit respectively. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 453/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Revenue Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.453/Jp/2024 On The Following Grounds; “(I) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.43,33,606/- Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Has Shown Bogus Purchase Of Rs 1,73,34,424/- During The Year From A Bogus Concern. 3

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

453/JP/2024 DCIT vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya Income Tax Act, by ITO, Ward 1 (2) and the National Faceless Assessment Unit respectively. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure of dispute. Thus, these appeals were heard

Rail Vikas Nigam Limited, New Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

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

ITA 1482/DEL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajinka Gunjan Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT DR

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 37

that Section 144B of the IT Act mandatorily provides for the issuance of a show cause notice and draft assessment order by the National Faceless Assessment Centre before issuing a final assessment order. 9. The Appellant craves leave to add to and/or amend and/or delete and/or modify and/or alter ... Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judgments: Pooja Singla Builders & Engineers (P) Ltd. v. National • Faceless Assessment Centre [2022] 440 ITR 413 (Del) (page 42, SI. No. 7 of the paper book) • Sribasta Kumar Swain v. Union of India, [2022] 440 ITR 545 (Ori.) (page

Shri Ram Co.Op. Credit Society Limited, Dahod vs. The ACIT., Panchmahal Circle, Godhra

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1412/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Shri Ram Co-Op Credit Society Ltd. Acit, Panchmahal 0, Chakaliya Road Vs Circle Dahod. Godhra. Pan : Aagas 4007 A (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Shri Ravindra, SR.DR

Section 250Section 270Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 80PSection 9

issue, I am guided by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, (2022) 142 taxmann.com 38 (Delhi), and the following decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT: i) Alrameez Construction P.Ltd. Vs. CIT/NFAC

M/S. Vijay Jewellers, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax -19(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4204/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Hrithik Yadav / Shri DevangFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon SRDR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Jewellers, vs Additional / Joint / Deputy / Kundamal House, 67, Hughes Assistant Commissioner of Income- Road, Mumbai-400 007 tax, Income Tax Officer, National PAN: AAAFV3730A Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi / Present JAO – Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax-19(3), Mumbai Room No.605, Piramal chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 012 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri ... Assessment Years 2012-13& 2011-12,respectively,date of both the orders24.06.2024.The impugned orders were emanated from the orders of the Learned National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in brevity the ld. AO), orders passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, date of orders 16/03/2022

M/S. Vijay Jewellers, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax -19(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4203/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Hrithik Yadav / Shri DevangFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon SRDR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Mr Shashikant Yashwant Chaudhari, Jalgaon vs. Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Jalgaon

The appeal is PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 1363/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2020-21 Shashikant Yashwant Chaudhari, Block-8, Behind Gurudatta Mandir, Jijau Nagar, Nr. Wagh Nagar, Jalgaon-425001 Pan: Ahopc8437E . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: None for AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

from now] which in turn arisen out of order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. AO’ from now] for assessment year 2020-21 [‘AY’ from now]; ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 6 Shashikant Yashwant Chaudhari

ACIT Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Jmp Securities Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objection by the assessee is allowed, while the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3722/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri. Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri. K Gopal/ Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Meena Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 154Section 250Section 68

3722/MUM/2024 & CO No. 165/MUM/2024 (A.Y.: 2016-17) JMP Securities Pvt Ltd Assessing Officer and hence, the same is in violation of the Faceless Assessment Scheme as provided under section 151A of the Act. Thus, the notice issued under section 148 of the Act is unlawful, invalid ... actions of the NFAC in upholding the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Act is in contravention of the Faceless Assessment Scheme as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolhpaur vs. Rbl Bank Ltd, Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 657/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

page 94 to 95 of the paperbook) 17. Due to the dismissal of the appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2014- 15, the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) issued a notice on 10.06.2021 to show cause why the penalty under section 271(l)(c) should not be imposed

ACIT-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bennett Coleman & Company Limited, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 1520/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No.1387/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd. The Times Of India Building, Dr. Dadabhai Naoroji Road Fort, Mumbai-400 001 [Pan: Aaacb4373Q] Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्य्थी / (Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1520/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Acit-1(1)(1), Mumbai Vs Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd. The Times Of India Building, Dr. Dadabhai Naoroji Road Fort, Mumbai-400 001 [Pan: Aaacb4373Q] Assessee By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala A/W. Shri Madhur Agrawal, Shri Jas Sanghavi, Shri Yash Prakash & Shri Vikas Poojary Revenue By : Shri S. Srinivasu Cit Dr A/W. Shri Ashok Ambastha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2024 2 आदेश/Order आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ι.Τ.Α. No.1387/Mum/2023 & 1520/Mum/2023 Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. Per Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w. Shri MadhurFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu CIT DR a/w. Shri Ashok

Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 153

Year: 2018-19) Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd. The Times of India Building, Dr. Dadabhai Naoroji Road Fort, Mumbai-400 001 [PAN: AAACB4373Q] Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्य्थी / (Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1520/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) ACIT-1(1)(1), Mumbai Vs Bennett Coleman ... proof of same is enclosed herewith as annexure-2. From this, it is clearly evident that the FAO being AO of faceless Assessment Scheme has indeed concluded and finalised this Assessment order and uploaded on to ITBA on 28/09/2021 itself along with its generation as mentioned in this order

Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre., Delhi

ITA 1387/MUM/2023[2018--2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2024

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w. Shri MadhurFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu CIT DR a/w. Shri Ashok

Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 153

Boyina Vinoda, Machilipatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Machilipatnam

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

ITA 323/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 323/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Boyina Vinoda, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 21/225-1A, Batchupeta, Ward-1, Kennedy Road, Machilipatnam, Machilipatnam-521001. Krishna Districit – 521001, Andhra Pradesh. Pan:Bewpb8581A (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 27/09/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

merits. 3. The issue of Notice dated 22/2/2023 U/s. 148A(b) by the JAO was bad in law (ie., Sec 151A r.w the Faceless Assessment Scheme) and as such all the subsequent proceedings are also bad in law. 4. The appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds

Agamani Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 365/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.365/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Agamani Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant Vandana Auto Rmakund, G.E. Road, Chhattisgarh-492001. (Pan: Aagca6022P) Vs. Assessing Officer ………… Respondent National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. Appearances By: Shri Abhisek Bansal, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Addl. Cit Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 27.09.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2013-14 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 29.12.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68

No.365/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Agamani Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant Vandana Auto Rmakund, G.E. Road, Chhattisgarh-492001. (PAN: AAGCA6022P) Vs. Assessing Officer ………… Respondent National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. Appearances by: Shri Abhisek Bansal, AR appeared for Appellant. Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Addl. CIT appeared for Respondent. Date of concluding ... assessment order I.T.A. No. 365/Kol/2024 Agamani Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., AY : 2013-14 framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 19.09.2021. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: “1. For that the assessment order passed

Iifl Samasta Finance Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1054/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(7)Section 270A(8)Section 40Section 43

ITA No.1054/Bang/2024 IIFL Samasta Finance Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED

DCIT, 13(3)(2), Mumbai., Aayakar Bhawan vs. Moshau Value Research Private Limited, Goregaon East, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3782/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 194CSection 69C

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055345957(1), dated 28.08.2023, against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 27.12.2022 for Assessment Year

Inst of Tool Room Trg Up, Lucknow vs. ITO, NFAC, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 332/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 253(3)

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.332/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Inst of Tool Room Trg UP Vs. Income Tax Officer, A-1, ITTUP, Kanpur Road, National Faceless Assessment Amausi Industrial Area, Centre, Delhi. Lucknow. PAN:AABCI3555J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Ashish Agrawal, Advocate Respondent by Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl

Dhirain Mahesh Sadhwani, Kalyan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1), Kalyan

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

ITA 772/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Makhija, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059215490(1), dated 29.12.2023, against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, u/s. 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 16.09.2021 for Assessment Year