← All Phrases

“national faceless assessment centre”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144BSection 144B1,082 judgments

The decision most relied on for national faceless assessment centre is Mark Studio India (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, High Court of Madras (169 Taxmann.com 542), cited in 50 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on national faceless assessment centre

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).

Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
174 Taxmann.com 1203 · 2025 · High Court
43
citing judgments

Where the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) and the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) have concurrent jurisdiction, a notice issued by the JAO under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is valid, provided no prejudice is caused to the assessee.

Judgments citing national faceless assessment centre

Tayal Sons Private Limited, Hisar vs. DCIT, Hisar

The Appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 3322/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No. 3323/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Tayal Sons Private Vs Dcit Limited Income Tax Office, Sesctor14, 653A, Kath Mandi Road, Hisar, Hisar, Haryana Pan: Aabct6693E Appellant Respondent Ita No. 3467/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Dcit Vs Tayal Sons Private Limited Income Tax Office, 653A, Kath Mandi Road, Hisar, Sesctor14, Hisar, Haryana. Pan: Aabct6693E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv, Ms. Ishitafarsiya, Adv, Ms. Soumya Singh, Adv& Ms. Sakshirustagi. Revenue By Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 27/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Captioned Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Two

Section 144BSection 148Section 148ASection 151

under Section 144B of the Act. The order of CBDT is clear that direction was issued about passing of "assessment orders" by the National Faceless Assessment Centre under Section 144B of the Act except in two situations, one of which is passing of assessment orders in cases assigned to International ... case of Mark Studio India (P) Ltd vs ITO reported in 169 taxmann.com 542 (Mad HC), wherein it was observed that National Faceless Assessment Centre (NaFAC) would not have any power of issuance of notice under section 148 or 148A of the Act and would assume jurisdiction for assessment, reassessment

Sonia Bhaskar, New Delhli vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 5649/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalsonia Bhaskar Vs. National Faceless Assessment B22 Maharani Baghi Centre Delhi- 110065 Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabps2386J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143

order dated 09.09.2021 passed u/s 143 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “AO”) for AY: 2018-19. P a g e | 2 Sonia Bhaskar (AY: 2018-19) 2. None appeared

Kusum Mittal, Sangrur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - Sangrur, Sangrur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 941/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

legally competent to issue notice under section 148 of the Act as the same was required to be issued by National Faceless Assessment Centre and as such the proceedings initiated are illegal, arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the notice issued u/s 148 is barred by limitation as held

Tirathraj Rajmurat Maurya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(6), Surat

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law and without jurisdiction as NFAC was not empowered under any valid Notification to frame assessments under the faceless scheme prior ... respect of this additional ground, the appellant respectfully submits that the re-assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is without jurisdiction and bad in law, as the NFAC had no statutory authority to frame assessments in faceless mode prior

Tirathraj Rajmurat Maurya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(6), Surat

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 504/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law and without jurisdiction as NFAC was not empowered under any valid Notification to frame assessments under the faceless scheme prior ... respect of this additional ground, the appellant respectfully submits that the re-assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is without jurisdiction and bad in law, as the NFAC had no statutory authority to frame assessments in faceless mode prior

Tirathraj Rajmurat Maurya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(6), Surat

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 501/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law and without jurisdiction as NFAC was not empowered under any valid Notification to frame assessments under the faceless scheme prior ... respect of this additional ground, the appellant respectfully submits that the re-assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is without jurisdiction and bad in law, as the NFAC had no statutory authority to frame assessments in faceless mode prior

Ajithkumar Singu, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward (International Taxation), Vijayawada

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

ITA 348/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.348/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2021-22) Vs. Ajithkumar Singu The Income Tax Officer Ward (International Taxation) D.No. 8-76-1, Murikipudi Income Tax Office Chilakaluripeta C.R. Building, Annex Ramachandrapuram M.G. Road Guntur – 522626 Vijayawada – 520002 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Etxps2554D]

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

scrutiny under CASS to verify the claim of large exempt income and notice under section 143(2) was issued on 28.06.2022 by National Faceless Assessment Centre (in short “NFAC"). Later, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 12.08.2022 calling for information was issued and served on the assessee

Arkay Energy (Rameswarm) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1562/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1562/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. Arkay Energy (Rameswarm) Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan: Aafca0044C (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 20/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 26/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.07.2025 Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, SR-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250

failed to appreciate the fact that the notice u/s 148 dated 31/03/2024 was issued by the DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad instead of National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi, as mandated u/s 151A r.w.s 144B of the Act, which is invalid & without jurisdiction. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) failed

Epam Systems India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle -8 (1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 83/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.83 & 498/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Epam Systems India The Dcit & The Acit, Private Limited, Vs. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081 Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw2012R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Shreyas Sardesai राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Shreyas SardesaiFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

ITA.No.83/Hyd./2022 – A.Y. 2017-2018 : 2. The has raised the following grounds of appeal : “The Appellant objects to the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 28 January 2022 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 1448 of the Income

Epam Systems India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 498/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.83 & 498/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years 2017-2018 & 2018-2019 Epam Systems India The Dcit & The Acit, Private Limited, Vs. Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081 Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw2012R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Shreyas Sardesai राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Shreyas SardesaiFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

ITA.No.83/Hyd./2022 – A.Y. 2017-2018 : 2. The has raised the following grounds of appeal : “The Appellant objects to the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 28 January 2022 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 1448 of the Income

Khajamohiaddin Ghousemohiaddin Syed, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 41(4)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 2852/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh MilwaniFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)Section 444DSection 44A

short, ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2013-14, date of order 03/03/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (for brevity, ‘Ld.AO’) passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, date of order 30/03/2022. 2 Khajamohiaddin Ghousemohiaddin Syed 2. The brief facts

Usb Financial Corporation Ltd, Noida vs. ITO Ward-1(2)(4), Meerut

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

ITA 376/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Usb Financial Corporation Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, Suit No. 201, H-160, Sector-63 Ward- 1(2)(4), Noida, Uttar Pradesh Meerut Pin: 201 301 Pan :Aabcs9381C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 271Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Ajay Pal Singh, Noida Gautom Buddh Nagar vs. ITO Ward 1(1) Noida Gbn, Noida

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

ITA 2253/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaajay Pal Singh, Vs. Ito, Ward 1 (1), Village Gadi, Near Dadri Noida. Gautam Budh Nagar - 201 301 Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Axgps6679A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.09.2025 Date Of Order : 26.11.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 12.02.2025 For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Had Originally Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.43,88,320/-. Subsequently, Assessee Filed Revised Return On 30.03.2021 Declaring Revised Total Income Of Rs.31,26,700/-. The Return Of Income Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). Subsequently, The Case

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 156Section 249Section 270ASection 270MSection 276C

attract by mere reference of misreporting of Income. The petitioner, Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP. approached High Court against the order of respondent, National Faceless Assessment Centre imposing a penalty of Rs.2,50,78,168/- under section 270A of the Act alleging misreporting of income. The counsel for the petitioner submitted

Ajay Gupta, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Faridabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3011/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2017-18 Ajay Gupta, Vs. Ito, 293, Sector-15, Ward-1(1), Faridabad, Faridabad. Haryana – 121006. Pan: Bdppg7239G

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Advocate; &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

against the order dated 28.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. Heard and perused the records. The assessee filed the return of income

Dbl Jaora-Sailana Tollways Private Limited, Bhopal vs. PCIT-1 Bhopal, Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 194/IND/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Nov 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2015-16 Dbl Jaora-Sailana Pcit-1, Tollways Private Ltd., Bhopal Plot No.5, Inside Govind Naryn Singh बनाम/ Gate, Vs. Kolar Road, Chunabhatti, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaecd4621R Assessee By Shri Yash Kukreja & Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.11.2025

Section 143(3)Section 263

PCIT”] u/s 263 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“impugned order”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 29.03.2022 passed by learned National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act for Assessment-Year [“AY”] Page 1 of 8 DBL Jaora - Sailana Tollways Private

Viswanathan Krishnakumar, Aluva vs. Income Tax Officer, Aluva

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

ITA 606/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal.

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar P J, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal. Snr AR
Section 147Section 148Section 24Section 250Section 54FSection 80C

short, ‘the Act’) for assessment year 2015-16, date of order 26/06/2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre (in short, ‘Ld. AO’) passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, date of order 27/03/2022. 2 ITA 606/Coch/2025 VishwanathanKrishnakumar 2. The brief facts

Capgemini Technology Services India Limited ( Successor of Aricent Technologies Holdings Limited), Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1260/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Vyomesh PathakFor Respondent: Shri Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(18)Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(6)(a)Section 270A(7)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

fast-track settlement of issue, (ii) recover tax demand; and (iii) reduce protracted litigation. [Emphasis supplied] 25. In Ultimate Infratech Private Limited vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi & Anr.(supra), Delhi High Court has held as under: "5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court ... conditions. 5.5 By respectfully following the judgment of Hon‘ble High court of Delhi in the case of Ultimate Infratech (P) Ltd. V. National faceless Assessment Centre Delhi & Anr (2022) 326 CTR 547, we are of the considered view that the assessee company acquired a right to be granted immunity

DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi vs. Cds Infra Projects Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue and cross-objection of Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1445/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Cds Infra Projects Ltd., B-94, Tax, Circle 4(2), Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi. New Delhi-110020 Pan :Aadcc0273D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

Income Tax, Circle-3 (3) (1), Mumbai, Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai-3, Additional Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi., Union of India, 2023 (2) TMI 719-Bombay High Court, Dated, 15-2-2023.  Ananta Landmark Pvt. Ltd. versus Deputy Commissioner

Shamsudeen Abdul Khadar, Kollam vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kollam

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

ITA 768/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shamsudeen Abdul Khadar .......... Appellant Nusaifa Manzil, Chithara, Madathara Kottarakkara, Kollam 691541 [Pan: Arjpa0218Q] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kollam .......... Respondent Assessee By: ------- None ------- Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 15.07.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual. The Appellant Had Not Filed The Return Of Income Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) For Ay 2017-18. Based On The Information That The Appellant Had Deposited Cash Amounting To Rs. 12,07,500/- During Ay 2017-18 In Bank Account Maintained With Kerala Grameen Bank, The Ao Formed An Opinion That Income Escaped Assessment To Tax. Therefore, The Ao

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

income on 29.05.2020 declaring total income of Rs. 3,69,350/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter called "the AO") vide order dated 20.09.2021 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act at total income

Sourabh Sharma, Indore vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi, Delhi

The appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 342/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 253

Sourabh Sharma ITA No.342/Ind/2025 - A.Y. 2016-17 1) That impugned order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi is bad in law, without jurisdiction, it is based on incorrect interpretation of law, moreover the facts have also been incorrectly construed ... return of income. 7) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi erred in charging interest u/s 234B at Rs. 2,45,49,520/-. The interest charged under the said section is very excessive and high”. 3. Record