← 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

M/S. Supreme Infrastructure India Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 15 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 8171/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Shah (Virtually appear)For Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev Bhagat Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 date of all the orders 26.09.2025. The impugned orders emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "Ld. AO"), order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, date of order

M/S. Supreme Infrastructure India Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 15 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 8170/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Shah (Virtually appear)For Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev Bhagat Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2016-17 date of all the orders 26.09.2025. The impugned orders emanated from the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "Ld. AO"), order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, date of order

ACIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Delhi Control Devices Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5909/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi05 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanasstt. Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 14Section 147Section 53

Delhi High Court (Jurisdictional High Court). The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of M. Tech Developers (P.) Ltd. v. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [2024] 161 taxmann.com 736 (Delhi) has held that once the Resolution Plan is approved, no proceedings for prior period for any recovery

Madan Mohan Rao Puvvada, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1152/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1152/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Madan Mohan Rao The Income Tax Puvvada, Hyderabad. Officer, Ward-5(1), Vs. Pin – 500 063. Hyderabad. Pan Agjpp4754H Telangana. Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263

prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 3. In view of the above, it is clear that the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) of National Faceless Assessment Centre, (NaFAC) Delhi proceeded to complete the assessment without proper examination of the above facts, thereby resulting in an assessment that is not only erroneous

Late Abdullah Abdulmajeed, Rep. by L/H, Pudukkottai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pudukkottai

ITA 3294/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

cases referred to in sub- section (2), shall be made in a faceless manner as per the following procedure, namely:- (i) the National Faceless Assessment Centre shall assign the case selected for the purposes of faceless assessment under this section to a specific assessment unit through an automated allocation system ... National Faceless Assessment Centre shall intimate the assessee that assessment in his case shall be completed in accordance with the procedure laid down under this section; (iii) a notice shall be served on the assessee, through the National Faceless Assessment Centre, under sub-section (2) of section 143 or under

Guntupalli Nageswara Rao, Ibrahimpatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 379/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 8Section 80CSection 80DSection 80E

facts and circumstances of the case the orders passed u/s 147 of the IT Act dt: 12/05/2023 passed by the Assessment Officer National Faceless Assessment Centre and upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC vide orders u/s 250 of the IT Act dt: 20/03/25 is contrary to the facts

Guntupalli Nageswara Rao, Ibrahimpatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 378/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 8Section 80CSection 80DSection 80E

facts and circumstances of the case the orders passed u/s 147 of the IT Act dt: 12/05/2023 passed by the Assessment Officer National Faceless Assessment Centre and upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC vide orders u/s 250 of the IT Act dt: 20/03/25 is contrary to the facts

Mohammad Nazim Ahmad, Nalanda vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Biharshariff

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 371/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am**

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

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessment has been framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre vide order dated 14.03.2022, which in our opinion, is without jurisdiction as the Provisions of Section 151A of the Act which provides for faceless

Delta Dealers Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward No. 13(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2582/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151A

reassessment order dated 30.03.2022 passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the National Faceless Assessment Centre is without Se e|2 ITA No. 2582/KOL/2025 Delta Dealers Private Limited; A.Y. 2013-14 jurisdiction, void ab initio and liable to be quashed ... Therefore, we are inclined to admit the same for adjudication. The facts in brief are that in this case the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi has assumed jurisdiction prior to the date of notification on 29.03.2022 issued making the provisions of section 151A effective from that and framed the assessment

Sushanta Ghosh, Hooghly vs. I.T.O., Ward - 24(1), Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2533/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151A

Officer. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessment has been framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre vide order dated 22.03.2022, which in our opinion, is without jurisdiction as the Provisions of Section 151A of the Act which provides

Chitrakoot Tradeline Private Limited, Kolkata vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 193/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Chitrakoot Tradeline Private Limited National Faceless Assessment C/O Agarwal Vishwanath & Centre, Associates, 2Nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Vs. 133/1/1A, S.N. Banerjee Road, Nehtru Road, New Delhi-110003 Pushkal Bhawan, 3 Rd Floor, Kolkata-700103, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcc3130H Assessee By : S/Shri Deep Agarwal & Shubhankar Ghosh, Ars Revenue By : Shri Santanu Ghosh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2026

For Appellant: S/Shri Deep Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Santanu Ghosh, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 68

basis of the impugned assessment were issued prior to 29.03.2022, i.e., before the CBDT Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022 conferring jurisdiction upon the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) to conduct assessments under section 144B of the Act. Chitrakoot Tradeline Private Limited; A.Y. 2012-13 2.1. After hearing the rival contentions ... After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessment has been framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre vide order dated 14.03.2022, which in our opinion, is without jurisdiction as the Provisions of Section 151A of the Act which provides for faceless

Rajib Sarkar, Raiganj vs. ITO, Ward 2(4), Raiganj

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

ITA 2781/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250Section 69

taking a ground which reads as under: “For that on the facts and circumstances and legal position of the case, the Ld. AO, National faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) erred in having assumed jurisdiction under section 151A, read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 from 15.3.2022 when

Palak Designer Diamond Jewellery, Mahidharpura, Surat vs. Ld. AO, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 955/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 147Section 148Section 250

facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the impugned assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and deserves to be quashed. 2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case

Palak Designer Diamond Jewellery, Mahidharpura, Surat vs. Ld. AO, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 954/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 147Section 148Section 250

facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the impugned assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and deserves to be quashed. 2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case

Palak Designer Diamond Jewellery, Mahidharpura Surat vs. Ld. AO, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 953/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 147Section 148Section 250

facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the impugned assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and deserves to be quashed. 2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case

Rushina Vikram Desai, Ahmedabad vs. Ward 3(3)(2), Income Tax Officer, Vejalpur, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2300/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(14)Section 250Section 69Section 69B

raised by the Assessee are as follows: Your appellant being aggrieved by the Order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), presents this appeal against the same on the following amongst other

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-(1), Raipur vs. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Raipur

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 455/RPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 455/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2022-23) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs Rajesh Kumar Singh, New Purena, Circle-1(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Ravigram, Ravigram S O, Civil Lines, Raipur, C. G., 492001. Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492001 Pan: Ajnps2776H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Suraj Gupta, Advocate (Virtually) राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 19/02/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: This Appeal For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2022-23 Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.05.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [‘Cit(A)’], National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’), Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 69C

Unit (VU), Technical Unit (TU) and Review Unit (RU) under the Faceless Assessment provisions of section 144B of the Act issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (‘NaFAC’) vide its letter F. No. Pr.CCIT/ NaFAC/Delhi/CIT-1/2022-23/112/92 dated 03.08.2022 to submit that this SOP for Verification Unit (VU) under the Faceless Assessment ... carry out physical verification as per the SOP under the Faceless Assessment provisions of section 144B of the Act issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (‘NaFAC’) vide letter F. No. Pr.CCIT/ NaFAC/Delhi/CIT-1/2022-23/112/92 dated 03.08.2022. The relevant part of the SOP provides/reads as under: “J. Reference to Verification Unit

Nokha Trading LLP, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2397/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Marlecha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 1Section 10Section 10(35)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 56(2)(i)

order dated 21.6.2021 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Page 2 of 10 Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [ld. AO] was dismissed. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “ 1. General Grounds 1.1. The National Faceless Assessment

Income Tax Officer, Kakinada vs. Andhra Pradesh United Teachers Federation, Kakinada

ITA 609/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

revenue has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: “1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) had erred in setting aside the order of the assessment completed

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai vs. PCIT-4, Chennai

ITA 3261/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No 3261/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, No. 2 Dare House, Chennai G.P.O, Parrys, Chennai-600001. V. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pcit, Chennai Room No 301, 3Rd Floor, Wanaparthy Block, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600034 [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से//Assessee By प्रत्योंकों की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : Mr. Sandeep Bagmar, R, Advocate : Mr. Shiva Srinivas, Cit : 25.11.2025 : 18.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.11.2024 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4 (Hereinafter Referred To As "Pcit") U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, ("The Act") For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020- 21.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 154Section 263Section 80G

Income on 29 December 2020 declaring a total income of Rs.398,85,42,450/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the National Faceless Assessment Centre ('Learned NFAC' or 'AO) issued notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act calling for various details and conducted a complete inquiry