← 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

Kundarapalli Narashiman Natarajan, Krishnagiri vs. ITO, Ward-1, Krishnagiri

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

ITA 1800/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1800/Chny/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 Shri Kundarapalli Narashiman The Income Tax Officer, Natarajan, Vs. Ward-1, No.144, Madras Road New Pet, Krishnagiri. Krishnagiri – 635 001. Pan: Aempn 8708C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, F.C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar,Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064419040 (1) Dated 29.04.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18 U/S.147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 24.03.2022. 2. The Common Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To Estimating Income By Applying Profit Rate Of 8% By Treating The Deposits Made As Turnover For An Amount Of Rs.13,20,33,640/-And Also Addition Made By Ao Of Cash Deposits Made During Demonetization Period In Specified Bank Notes Amounting To Rs.1,65,28,590/- Added U/S.69A R.W.S. 115Bbe Of The Act Without Providing Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Assessee & Also The Order Of Cit(A)-Nfac Is Dismissal For Default On The Part Of The Assessee & No Adjudication On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, F.C.A ""For Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar,CIT
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 69A

Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064419040 (1) dated 29.04.2024. The assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide order

Velappa Rowther Abdul Azeez Mohamed Raja, Erode vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Erode

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

ITA 1766/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate for Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 147

Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1058924597(1) dated 20.12.2023. The assessment was framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14 u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide

St. Marys Matriculation Hr.Sec. School, Cuddalore vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

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

ITA 1541/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1541/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. St. Marys Matriculation – The Ito (Exemptions), Hr. Sec. School, Ward-2, (The Educational Institute Of The Chennai. Sisters Of St. Joseph Of Cluny), Old Hospital Road, Sorkalpet, Cuddalore – 607 001. [Pan: Aacas 7855 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 11

Rs.1,01,06,776/- by order dated 30.03.2015. The assessee immediately filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) which appeal was transferred to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) and the notices were issued to the e-mail of the Ld.AR, Mr.Daniel Selvaraj, CA, who was not well-versed with

L.K. Exports, Mumbai vs. ITO Mum-W-(199)(91), Ward 23(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3582/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran: A.Y : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh C. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151

various reasons. Firstly, it is submitted that the impugned notice has been issued by the JAO and not by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) as required by the ‘e-assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022’ (‘2022 Scheme’ for short) notified by the CBDT vide notification dated 29.03.2022. Secondly

Syniverse Technologies Services (India) Private Ltd., Haryana vs. ACIT Tp-1(3)(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)

High Court in the aforenoted paragraphs of Vodafone Idea and in Shell India Markets Private Limited v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre & Ors. The relevant paragraph of the decision in Shell India are extracted herein below: “10. Sub-section (131 of Section 144C. therefore ... additionally stated to have been dispatched through Speed Post to the third respondent (TPO) and the fourth respondent (Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi) on 27 June 2022. It is thereafter that the TPO appears to have passed the order dated 25 July

Aarna Infrazone Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. Pr, CIT, Noida

In the result, the impugned order is upheld and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1208/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri S Krishnan, and V. Rajkumar, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 263

perusal of the Hon'ble Bench and the CIT(DR), ITAT, Delhi. It is clear on perusal of the notices issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO) that nowhere has he/she enquired regarding Annexure 'A-8' of the seized material or the alleged monies received as advances from M/s Savitri ... completed on return income. From the perusal of assessment record for the year under consideration, it has been observed that the assessing officer of Faceless Assessment Unit has accepted the return income without properly verifying the aforesaid claims of the assessee w.r.t the advances received from M/s Savitri Fashion Crafts

Rajesh Khanna, Neelkanth Plywood, Yamunanagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Yamunanagar

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 62/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT Sr.DR
Section 148Section 69A

learned AO in. reopening of assessment u/s 148 by Jurisdictional Assessing officer which is contrary to CBDT Instruction of notice to be issued by Faceless Assessing officer. (same as above) 3. That learned CIT(A) (NFAC) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the actions of learned ... been provided to the assessee during the Re-Assessment proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act. Furthermore, the show cause notice issued by the Faceless Assessing ITA 62, 230/CHD/2024 & S.A.11/CHD/2024 A.Y.2018-19 7 Officer dated. 19.03.2023 during the Re-Assessment proceedings contains therein the modus operandi and the images of the relevant

Income Tax Officer, Yamuna Nagar vs. Rajesh Khanna, Yamuna Nagar

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 230/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT Sr.DR
Section 148Section 69A

learned AO in. reopening of assessment u/s 148 by Jurisdictional Assessing officer which is contrary to CBDT Instruction of notice to be issued by Faceless Assessing officer. (same as above) 3. That learned CIT(A) (NFAC) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the actions of learned ... been provided to the assessee during the Re-Assessment proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act. Furthermore, the show cause notice issued by the Faceless Assessing ITA 62, 230/CHD/2024 & S.A.11/CHD/2024 A.Y.2018-19 7 Officer dated. 19.03.2023 during the Re-Assessment proceedings contains therein the modus operandi and the images of the relevant

Ranjay Developers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-14(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is restored back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer with the direction to the assessee to furnish the necessary details before the Assessing

ITA 308/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shrisunil Kumar Singh, Jm A.Y.2011-12

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 68

facts and circumstances of the case, and in Law the Additional / Joint/ Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, The AO erred reopening the assessment of the appellant under section 147 of the assessment without fresh tangible material . The A erred in reopening ... facts and circumstances of the case, and in Law, the Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi the AO erred in making the addition as unexplained cash credit us 68 of Rs 2,75,00,000 by treating amount received

Aadesh Commodities Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3959/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Harmesh Lal
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 68

Year : 2013–14) Aadesh Commodities Pvt Ltd 401, Satyam Tower, 90 Feet Road, Asha Nagar, Kandivali (E), ……………. Appellant Mumbai-400101 PAN – AAHCA3726H v/s National Faceless Assessment ……………. Respondent Centre, Delhi Assessee by :Shri Jay Bhansali Revenue by :Shri Harmesh Lal Date of Hearing –03/06/2024 Date of Order – 19/08/2024

Pareshkumar Punamchand Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1096/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: CA Preyashi TatedFor Respondent: Shri Hrishikesh Hemant Patki, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 250Section 253(3)

various levels and stages including filing and processing of returns of income, filing and processing of various applications under various provisions of the statute, faceless assessments , faceless adjudication of appeals, appellate proceedings , and in this switchover phase, there is every possibility that there could be initial hiccups , difficulties, glitches

The Farmers Service Co-Operative Limited, Srikakulam vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Srikakulam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 166/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.166/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Farmers Service Co-Operative Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-1, Srikakulam. Srikakulam. Pan: Aabtt4377L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri I. Kama Sastry, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 14/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

justified in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 22,64,026/- made by the AO U/s. 80P(2)(a)(i)”. 2. The Assessment unit National Faceless Assessment Centre is not justified in taking Rs. 48,34,258/- as business income of the assessee and determining the taxable income

Ashok Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. PCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1394/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

vide order dated 26.12.2016. The impugned re-assessment order was passed by the Addl./Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 24.03.2022. 2. This appeal by assessee is arising out of revision order passed by the PCIT

Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. I.T.O., -2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4811/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (National Faceless Appeals Centre) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer (National Faceless Assessment Centre), in making an addition of Rs. 61,32,83,863/- under section 69 of the Act.” 10. We have heard the Ld. AR on behalf

Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4755/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 144rSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (National Faceless Appeals Centre) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer (National Faceless Assessment Centre), in making an addition of Rs. 61,32,83,863/- under section 69 of the Act." 10. We have heard the Ld. AR on behalf

Maulana Azad Alpsankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4751/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan & & Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit 2(2)(3), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, D. D. Building, Shahid Room No. 542, Ayakar Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai – Bhavan, Maharshi Karve 400 023. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – Pan: Aadcm6528R 400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (National Faceless Appeals Centre) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer (National Faceless Assessment Centre), in making an addition of Rs. 61,32,83,863/- under section 69 of the Act.” 10. We have heard the Ld. AR on behalf

I M C of I T I, Arvalli vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 597/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2024

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Division Bench, Ahmedabad

For Appellant: None(Adjournment Application-Rejected)For Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 253(3)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

various levels and stages including filing and processing of returns of income, filing and processing of various applications under various provisions of the statute, faceless assessments , faceless adjudication of appeals, and in this switchover phase, there is every possibility that there could be initial hiccups , difficulties, glitches and adaptability

I M C of I T I, Arvalli vs. The CIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 596/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2024

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Division Bench, Ahmedabad

For Appellant: None(Adjournment Application-Rejected)For Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 253(3)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

various levels and stages including filing and processing of returns of income, filing and processing of various applications under various provisions of the statute, faceless assessments , faceless adjudication of appeals, and in this switchover phase, there is every possibility that there could be initial hiccups , difficulties, glitches and adaptability

Income Tax Office Ward -1 Sonepat, Sonepat, Haryana vs. Om Minirals, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 209/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. J. P. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(10)(c)Section 270A(2)(a)Section 270A(3)(ii)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

penalty whether under section 270A(8) or under section 270A(7) can be imposed. Cases relied on: Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP vs. National Faceless Assessment Center 2022(6) TMI 130- Delhi High Court. 7 CO No. 16/Del/2024 Om Minerals 9. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied

Mr. Ganesh Ayodhyaprasad Jaiswal, Nanded vs. Assessing Officer, Ward-1, Nanded

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 730/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2009-10 Mahendra Mohanlalji Jaiswal, Besides Tulja Mata Mandir, Near Power House, Darga Base, Jalna. Pan: Amzpj5075F . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Jalna. . . . . . . . Respondent & Assessment Year : 2016-17 Ganesh Ayodhyaprasad Jaiswal, At Mandvi Mandvi, Kinwat, Nanded. Pan: Auspj5624P . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Nanded. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Ms Deepa Khare & Mr Hari Krishan [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Umesh Phade [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 01/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/08/2024 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; These Two Appeals Of Different Assessee Filed Against Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1037975185(1) Dt. 21/12/2021 & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1056525970(1) Dt. 26/09/2023 Respectively Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Ms Deepa Khare & Mr Hari Krishan [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Umesh Phade [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)

730/PUN/2024 5. We observed that, against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [‘NeAC’ hereinafter] for assessment year 2016-17 [‘AY’ hereinafter] the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. NFAC on 20/08/2022. After instituting the appeal