“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

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

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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Bahwan Cybertek Pvt Ltd, Chennai

ITA 1836/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1836/Chny/2024 & C.O.No.62/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.: 1836/Chny/2024) निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1(1) Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Bahwan Cybertek Private Limited, Vs. No.148, Bahwan Cybertek It Park, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (Omr), Okkiyam, Thoraipakkam, Chennai - 600 097. [Pan: Aabcb- 2020-P] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/ Cross Objector) It(Tp) A No.: 22/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bahwan Cybertek Private Limited, No.148, Bahwan Cybertek It Park, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (Omr), Okkiyam, Thoraipakkam, Chennai - 600 097. [Pan: Aabcb- 2020-P] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1(1) Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Department By : Shri. N. V. Balaji, Advocate : Shri. Ar. V. Sreenivasan, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025 : 21.11.2025 आदेश /O R Der Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : These Appeals Are Filed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -16, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld.Cit(A)”] For The

For Respondent: Shri. N. V. Balaji, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92C

Ld.CIT(A)”] for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2017-18 arising out the final assessment order dated 26.11.2021 passed by the Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre – Delhi, (AO) u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). 1.1 At the outset, we find that there

Mukeshkumar Bhawarlal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 23(2)(6), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6694/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Smt.Renu Jauhri7 (A.Y.2014-15)

For Appellant: Mr. Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri- Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 69A

valid without appreciating the fact that the said notice was issued by the Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by the National Faceless Assessment Centre in contravention of the faceless scheme and notification issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes in Notification no. 18 of 2022. Additional Ground

Dsv Air & Sea Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cirle-3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3653/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt.Renu Jauhri(Physical Hearing)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 253Section 254(1)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

against the order dated on 30 May 2024 passed by the Additional Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax/Income-tax officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi, Assessment Unit, Income-Tax Department (learned AO") issued under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(13) read with Sections 144(B), ('final assessment

Muraleedharan Pillai Arunkumar, Kollam vs. ITO Ward 1 & Tps, Alappuzha

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

ITA 690/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Muraleedharan Pillai Arunkumar .......... Appellant Karuvazhathu House, Thevalakara P.O. Palickal, Karunagappally 690524 [Pan: Avjpa3922F] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-1&Tps, Alappuzha.......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Krishnan, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.11.2025 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 30.07.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual. No Regular Return Of Income For Ay 2017-18 Was Filed By The Appellant. Based On The Information That The Appellant Made Cash Deposits Of Rs. 1,65,98,650/- National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Formed An Opinion That Income Escaped Assessment To Tax. Accordingly, A Notice U/S. 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Was Issued On 30.03.2021. In 2 Muraleedharan Pillai Arunkumar Response To The Notice U/S. 148, The Appellant Filed Return Of Income On 29.11.2021 Disclosing Income Of Rs. 3,00,990/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Ao Vide Order Dated 29.03.2022 Passes U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act At Total Income Of Rs. 30,70,746/-. While Doing So, The Ao Made Addition Of Cash Deposits Of Rs. 20,11,631/- S Unexplained Money Of The Appellant. The Ao Also Made Addition On Account Of Vendor Commission Of Rs. 7,58,125/-.

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

filed by the appellant. Based on the information that the appellant made cash deposits of Rs. 1,65,98,650/- National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter called "the AO") formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, a notice u/s. 148 of the Income

Swiss Re Asia Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation) Circle - 4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, we hold that the assessee does not have any permanent establishment in India, whether as fixed place

ITA 4092/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 144CSection 9(1)(i)

year 2020-21, Ground 1 challenges the validity of assessment on the footing that notice under section 143(2) was issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre instead of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. During the course of hearing, this ground was not pressed and we therefore dismiss

Swiss Re Asia Pte Ltd, Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (International Taxation) Circle - 4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, we hold that the assessee does not have

ITA 3178/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Section 144CSection 9(1)(i)

Aroma Chemicals, Moradabad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Moradabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2465/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ITA No.- 2465/Del/2025 Aroma Chemicals to as ‘the Act’) by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. AO’) pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16. 2. In this case, the assessment was reopened vide notice

Ashok Rudraraju, Visakhapatnam vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 439/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 439/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ashok Rudraraju, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-2(5), Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aqvpr4058L

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151ASection 251(1)(a)Section 69A

CCIT; CCIT; Pr. CIT or CIT as mandated by the provisions of section 151(1) as applicable upto 31.03.2021. 5. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre is not justified in making the addition of Rs. 30,12,755 /- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income

Sree Pazhanchira Devi Temple, Trivandrum vs. Assessing Officer, Exemption Ward, Tvm

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

ITA 826/COCH/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sree Pazhanchira Devi Temple Trust .......... Appellant Poonthura P.O., Ambalathara Thiruvananthapuram 695026 [Pan: Aamts1272L] Vs. Ito (Exemption), Thiruvananthapuram ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Krishnan, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 07.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 138Section 142(1)Section 148

appellant neither complied with the notice u/s. 148 nor the notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act. In the circumstance, the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter called "the AO") was constrained to pass best judgement assessment treating the cash deposits as unexplained money of the trust. Accordingly made

Naippalli Chirayil Chandy Joseph, Alappuzha vs. ITO Ward 2, Alappuzha

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

ITA 748/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2015-16 Naippalli Chirayil Chandy Joseph .......... Appellant Naippallichirayil House, Edathua, Alappuzha [Pan: Anspj6746P] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Alappuzha .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri K. Balaji, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025 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 18.08.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual. No Regular Income For Ay 2015-16 Was Filed By The Appellant. Based On The Information That The Appellant Made Cash Deposits In Bank Account During The Previous Year Relevant To Ay 2015-16, Ao Formed An Opinion That Income Escaped Assessment To Tax. Accordingly, A Notice U/S. 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Was Issued On 07.04.2022 After Complying With The Procedures

For Appellant: Shri K. Balaji, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 148A

148A of the Act. In response to the notice u/s. 148, the appellant had not filed return of income. In the circumstances the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] (hereinafter called "the AO") completed the assessment vide order dated 15.01.2024 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B

Waterworld Tourism Company Private Limited, Alappuzha vs. ITO Ward 1 & Tps, Alappuzha

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

ITA 726/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2018-19 Water World Tourism Company Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant Room No. 18, Municipal Shopping Centre Zilla Court Ward, Opp. Boat Jetty Thathampally S.O., Alappuzha 688013 [Pan: Aabcm3387L] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-1& Tps, Alappuzha ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Thomas Joseph, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Thomas Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

Water World Tourism Company Pvt. Ltd. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] (hereinafter called "the AO") vide order dated 17.09,2021 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 20/GTY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2020-21/1030196443(1) dated 29.01.2021 (Refer Page- 46-49 Paper Book A.Y. 2020-21) during the faceless assessment proceedings at National Faceless Assessment Centre for A.Y. 2018-19 as to under which section, the Appellant is claiming deduction and it was alleged therein that the appellant was claiming deduction

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 19/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 18/GTY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Tiruchirapalli vs. The Karur Vysya Bank Limited, Karur

ITA 1889/CHNY/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1502/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Karur Vysya Bank, Dcit, Erode Road, Vs. Circle-1, Karur – 639 002. Trichy. [Pan:Aaact-3373-J] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1889/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Karur Vysya Bank, Circle-1, Vs. Erode Road, Trichy. Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aaact-3373-J] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. S. Ananthan, C.A. & Ms. R. Lalitha, C.A. Department By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T. सुनवाई क* तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.09.2025 घोषणा क* तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am :

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ananthan, C.A. &For Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 41(4)

were issued on various dates calling for information. In response to the e-notices, the assessee submitted certain details before the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The Assessing Officer ignoring the submissions made by the assessee, passed an order u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 31.05.2021, assessing the Total Income

M/S. Karur Vysya Bank, Karur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Trichy

ITA 1502/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ananthan, C.A. &For Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 41(4)

Sanjay Kothari (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 19(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 760/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailsanjay Kothari (Huf), 1404, 14Th Floor, A Wing, Naman Midtown, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone West, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400013 Pan: Aajhs9132A V/S National Faceless Assessment Centre, ……………… Respondent Delhi

For Appellant: Ms. Shivani ShahFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR

Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 250

JUDICIAL MEMBER Sanjay Kothari (HUF), 1404, 14th Floor, A Wing, Naman MidTown, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone West, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400013 PAN: AAJHS9132A v/s National Faceless Assessment Centre, ……………… Respondent Delhi Assessee by : Ms. Shivani Shah Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR Date of Hearing – 04/11/2025 Date of Order - 17/11/2025

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4252/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

evidences, extracts of books of accounts etc. filed in the form of detailed ‘paperbook’ as well as assessment order dated 31.03.2022 passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), New Delhi u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B. In such assessment order addition of Rs.35,00,000/- was made to the returned income

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4251/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4207/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147