“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

Mahendra Mohanlalji Jaiswal, Jalna vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Jalna

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 678/PUN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

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

Cidco Employees Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Ward 28(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

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

ITA 700/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyalcidco Employees Co-Op. Credit Society, Ground Floor, Cidco Bhavan, Cbd Belapur, Navi Mumbai – 400 614 Pan:Aaaac2203N ..... Appellant Vs. Ito Ward 28(1) (3)/ Nfac Delhi ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt, Ld. DR

Section 143Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)Section 80Section 80P

case. The said grounds are reproduced as under. 1) In the facts and circumstances of case and in law the learned Faceless Assessing Officer has erred in making additions amounting to Rs. 59,200/-on account of non-deduction at TDS on professional fees paid by ignoring the fact that ... deducted and paid TDS on payments amounting to Rs. 45,000/- 2) In the facts and circumstances of case and in law the learned Faceless Assessing Officer has erred in making additions amounting to Rs. 3,87,709/- by disregarding the fact that the same have already been disallowed

Harshal Suresh Karvir, Palghar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 4477/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Harshal Suresh Karvir National Faceless Assessment Centre 2Nd Floor, E Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru 397, Sutar Ali, Chinchani, Vs. Palghar, Palghar-401 503 Stadium, Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Tanmay PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chogule

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B R BASKARAN, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Harshal Suresh Karvir National Faceless Assessment Centre 2nd Floor, E Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru 397, Sutar Ali, Chinchani, Vs. Palghar, Palghar-401 503 Stadium, Delhi PAN/GIR No. BHZPK 0168 E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee

Arrow Electronics India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 618/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 69C

assessment year 2020-21 dated 26.2.2024. The assessee raised following grounds: “1. General 1.1 The orders passed by Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre (NaFAC) (hereinafter referred as "AU" for brevity) as confirmed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred

Prayer Tech Solutions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeasl) Income Tax Department, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assesseeITA No

ITA 2686/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Madhumalati Ghosh (CIT DR)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 250Section 68

Solutions Private vs Commissioner of Income-tax Limited, (Appeals), R.No.9, 1st Floor, Qadri Manzil, Income Tax Department, National Marol Village, Nr. St. Lawrence Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi / School, Andheri East, Mumbai- Income-tax Officer, Ward-15(2)(1), 400 059 Mumbai PAN :AAFCP9303F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None Respondent ... short, ‘the Act’), for Assessment Year 2014-15, date of order14.03.2024.The impugned order was emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short, ‘the A.O.’) passed under section147r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144Bof the Act date of order27/03/2022. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal

Anwar M. Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-20(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2669/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shriamarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SRDR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 154Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

short, ‘the Act’), for Assessment Year 2018-19, date of order 12.04.2024.The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Learned National Faceless Assessment Centre(in short, ‘the A.O.’) passed under section 143(3)read with section 144B of the Act, date of order27/09/2021. Anwar M. Shaikh

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Nagpur vs. Vinodkumar Rajendralal Kochhar, Kamptee

In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed

ITA 386/NAG/2023[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. That thereafter the case was transferred to the FAS 2021 for assessment proceedings. That the Learned AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre issued an notice u/s.142 (1) bearing number ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2021- 22/1037283000(1) dated 26.11.2021 wherein the learned AO is enquiring on the same issue ... Income Tax Act, 1961 has been categorically stated in assessment order (Page No 3) as passed by the Learned AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi. 12. The Learned Assessing officer without having any regard to the information, explanations and clarifications as available on record as submitted during the course

Jami Pradhamika Vyavasayasharakara Parapathi Sangham Ltd., Vizianagaram vs. Income-Tax Officer, Vizianagaram

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 206/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 206/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Jami Pradhamika Vyavasaya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sahakara Parapathi Vizianagaram. Sanghamltd., Vizianagaram. Pan: Aabaj1927F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri I. Kama Sastry, Ar ""ाथ" की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(3)Section 69A

appeal is filed within the time allowed from the date the assessee came to know about the order passed by the Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre. 2. The reopening of assessment U/s. 147 is invalid and bad in law as the notice U/s. 148, dated 31/3/2021 under ... issued on 1/4/2021 without following the procedure prescribed under the new law effective from 01/04/2021. 3. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment centre, Delhi is not justified in treating the deposits of Rs. 1,11,69,421/- cash deposited in bank account of the assessee as unexplained money

Manda Dubey, Hoshangabad vs. Income Tax Officer Itrasi, Itrasi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 228/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Boradmanda Dubey, Ito, Ganeshganj

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction and barred by time limitation, hence, the reassessment order dated 03/09/2021 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre is also illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 3. That the impugned re-assessment is passed without issuing the mandatory notice

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Cisco Systems India Private Limited, Bengaluru

ITA 929/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K Mishra, CIT (DR)

Section 147Section 148

Thus, the assessee namely SA India ceased to exist with effect from appointed date of amalgamation i.e. 1st April 2010. 4. However, the National Faceless Assessment Center Delhi issued notice dated 31st March 2021 under section 148 of the Act on account of escapement of income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Cisco Systems India Private Limited, Bengaluru

ITA 928/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K Mishra, CIT (DR)

Section 147Section 148

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Cisco Systems India Private Limited, Bengaluru

ITA 927/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K Mishra, CIT (DR)

Section 147Section 148

Nivesh Group, Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, National Facless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine as infructuous

ITA 561/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usvs. Assessment Unit Nivesh Group Block-F, Sector – 12, Dwarka, National Faceless Assessment Delhi-110 075 Centre, Delhi-110 001 Pan No. Aamfn 1544 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pranshu Singhal, C.A. Revenue By Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.07.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am :

Section 144Section 144BSection 263

DELHI BEFORE PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER Vs. Assessment Unit Nivesh Group Block-F, Sector – 12, Dwarka, National Faceless Assessment Delhi-110 075 Centre, Delhi-110 001 PAN No. AAMFN 1544 J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Pranshu Singhal, C.A. Revenue by Shri Govind ... Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.12.2023 arising from the assessment order dated 28.03.2023 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘AO’) under Section 144 read with section 263 read with section 144B of the Income

Affaque Builders Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 299/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40A(3)Section 68

filed by the assessee. During the reassessment I.T.A No. 299/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 4 Affaque Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT proceedings under faceless assessment, the assessee filed its reply which reads as follows: “……In response to the above referred notice the assessee would like to submit most respectfully

Bse Limited, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 2863/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Bse Limited National Faceless Assessment Centre 25Th Floor, Phiroze Jeejeebhoy Towers, Delhi Vs. Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai-400 001

For Respondent: Shri A. R. Dhyani

Section 14ASection 250

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM BSE Limited National Faceless Assessment Centre 25th Floor, Phiroze Jeejeebhoy Towers, Delhi Vs. Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 PAN/GIR No. AACCB 6672 L (Assessee) : (Respondent) : Shri Niraj Sheth Assessee by Respondent

Bhavani Urban Co-Operative Bank Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Jalna

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 357/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Dr. CA Prashant V. MunotFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep P. Sathe

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 270Section 270ASection 270A(6)(a)Section 271(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

./2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Bhavani Urban Co-operative The Assistant / Deputy Bank Limited, Behind Old Commissioner of Income Tax, Bus Stand, Georari, National Faceless Assessment Taluka Georai, District vs. Centre, New Delhi. Beed. Maharashtra. PIN – 431 127 PAN AAAAB1230E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Dr. CA Prashant V. Munot

Mr. Naresh Topandas Aidasani, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi/ DCIT-27(2), Vashi, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the above terms

ITA 105/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)

meantime, Faceless Penalty Scheme, 2021 was launched on 12.01.2021, accordingly, the penalty proceedings were transferred to the Regional Faceless Penalty Center. The National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi therefore imposed minimum penalty Page | 2 ITA No. 105/Mum/2024 Naresh Topandas Aidasani

Miho Kikuchi, Thiruvannamalai vs. PCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed subject to above direction and modification in the order

ITA 1318/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1318/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Miho Kikuchi, The Principal Commissioner No.25, Chengam Road, Vs. Of Income Tax-8, Fourth Street, Chennai. Thiruvannamalai – 606 601. Pan: Bdepm 5316B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate & Dr. L. Natarajan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay, Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Revision Order Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai -8 In Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1063189420 (1) Dated 22.03.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Addl./Joint/Deputy/Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16 U/S.147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 27.03.2022. 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is Against The Revision Order Passed By Pcit U/S.263 Of The Act Revising The Assessment Framed By Ao Of National Faceless Assessment Centre Vide Order Dated 27.03.2022 U/S.147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act. For This Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds Which Are Factual, Argumentative & Exhaustive & Hence, Need Not Be Reproduced.

For Appellant: Shri Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay, Baran Som, CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 50CSection 50C(1)

Chennai -8 in Order No.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2023-24/1063189420 (1) dated 22.03.2024. The assessment was framed by the Addl./Joint/Deputy/Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi for the assessment year 2015-16 u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide order dated ... this appeal of assessee is against the revision order passed by PCIT u/s.263 of the Act revising the assessment framed by AO of National Faceless Assessment Centre vide order dated 27.03.2022 u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Act. For this assessee has raised various grounds which are factual, argumentative and exhaustive

Dee Are Texfab Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 743/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.743/Ahd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dee Are Texfab Pvt.Ltd. The Pcit 149, New Cloth Market बनाम/ Ahmedabad-1 O/S. Raipur Gate Raipur V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 002 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaecd 5136 H (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) …. ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28/03/2024 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Pr.Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 27/03/20223 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 147 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. Dee Are Texfab Pvt.Ltd. Vs. The Pr.Cit Asst. Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

asking the assessee to provide required details. The assessee also replied to all these notices. 2.1. The National Faceless Assessment Centre also sent one letter to jurisdictional AO requesting to provide all the details/documents seized during the course of search in case of Sanjay Govindram Agrawal indicating involvement ... proceedings, the AO issued multiple notices under Section 142(1) of the Act to the assessee, who duly responded to each. Additionally, the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) requested the jurisdictional the AO to provide all relevant documents seized during the search in the case of Sanjay Govindram Agrawal, which

The Federation of Sericulturists and Silk Weavers Cooperative Societies Ltd, Guntur vs. Assiatant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur

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

ITA 220/VIZ/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.220/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) The Federation Of Sericulturists Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of & Silk Weavers Cooperative Income Tax, Societies Ltd., Guntur. Circle-1(1), Pan: Aacft0220D Guntur. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Smt. A. Aruna, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148

notice U/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 30/03/2021 and accordingly the proceedings U/s. 147 of the Act were taken up by the Faceless Assessment Unit (NaFAC). However, the case was sent back U/s. 144B(8) of the Act to the Ld. AO’s office mentioning the category