← 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

Shahnaz Khatun Sohail, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1) Nashik, Nashik

ITA 387/PUN/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Sept 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: None for the assesseeFor Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 250Section 40A(3)

short] which in turn arisen out of three distinct order of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. AO’ in short. ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 6 Shahnaz Khatun Sohail Vs ITO ITA No. 385 to 387/PUN/2024 2. This

Shahnaz Khatun Sohail, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1) Nashik, Nashik

ITA 386/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: None for the assesseeFor Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 250Section 40A(3)

short] which in turn arisen out of three distinct order of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. AO’ in short. ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 6 Shahnaz Khatun Sohail Vs ITO ITA No. 385 to 387/PUN/2024 2. This

Shahnaz Khatun Sohail, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer Ward1(1), Nashik

ITA 385/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: None for the assesseeFor Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 250Section 40A(3)

short] which in turn arisen out of three distinct order of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. AO’ in short. ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 6 Shahnaz Khatun Sohail Vs ITO ITA No. 385 to 387/PUN/2024 2. This

Smt. Sharda, Harsud, Khandwa vs. The PCIT-1, Indore

In the result, appeals of the assesse in ITANo

ITA 263/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Premnarayan Pcit (1) 31, Somgaon Khurd, Aaykar Bhawan Harsud, Vs. Indore Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cjzpp1164J Smt. Sharda Pcit (1) A/45, Naya Harsud, Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Khandwa Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Fdxps2997P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2024

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 263Section 54B

exemption of Rs. 53,57,631/-. Further, the case was reopened u/s 147 and assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 1448 was passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) on 22/03/2022 accepting the returned income. 3. On perusal of the case records, it is observed that the assessee along with

Shri Premnarayan, Harsud, Khandwa vs. The PCIT-1, Indore

In the result, appeals of the assesse in ITANo

ITA 262/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Premnarayan Pcit (1) 31, Somgaon Khurd, Aaykar Bhawan Harsud, Vs. Indore Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cjzpp1164J Smt. Sharda Pcit (1) A/45, Naya Harsud, Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Khandwa Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Fdxps2997P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2024

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 263Section 54B

exemption of Rs. 53,57,631/-. Further, the case was reopened u/s 147 and assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 1448 was passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) on 22/03/2022 accepting the returned income. 3. On perusal of the case records, it is observed that the assessee along with

Gaurav Dugar, Chennai vs. PCIT-8, Chennai

ITA 948/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147wSection 148Section 263Section 43CSection 52(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(vii)

Subsequently, the assessment was reopened by issue of notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 and accordingly, reassessment was completed by National Faceless Assessment Centre., (NFAC) Delhi u/s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act vide order dated 26.03.2022. Subsequently, the Principal CIT issued show-cause notice for revising

International Seaport Dredging Private Limited, Chennai vs. PCIT - 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1597/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baram Som, IRS, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 71Section 79

Chennai in DIN No.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2023-24/ 1063734589(1) dated 30.03.2024. The assessment was framed by the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National faceless assessment centre, Delhi passed u/s.147 r.w.s144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2016-17 vide order dated

Elumalai Rajendran, Chennai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi

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

ITA 1587/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri. V. Veerabathram Prasanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baram Som, IRS. CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1063441302 (1) dated 27.03.2024. The assessment was framed by the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi, u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2013-14 vide order dated

Sapna Rastogi, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 1(2)(5), Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the assessment order is quashed

ITA 617/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151

against the order dated 30.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the AO). 2. On hearing both the sides, it comes up that amongst other grounds, the assessee

Vikas Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 55(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sumit Lalchandani, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 69A

issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2015-16 by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (‘AO’) and the Assessment Order passed thereunder are illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction, time-barred, and liable to be quashed. The National Faceless Appeal Centre

Shri Dinesh Chhaganlal Dave, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3, Satara

ITA 995/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2018-19 Dinesh Chhaganlal Dave 680, Main Road, Dahiwadi, Tal.-Man, Satara-415508 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Aompd7646H

For Appellant: None for the assesseeFor Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 148Section 250

/NFAC’ hereinafter] which in turn confirmed the ex-parte order of assessment passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [‘AO’ hereinafter] for assessment year 2018-19 [‘AY’ hereinafter]; ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 3 Dinesh Chhaganlal Dave Vs ITO 2. The case

Goyal Vegoils Limited, Kasar, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle -2, Kota

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

ITA 243/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

very recent decision, ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Jitendra Udaylal Jain vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) in ITA No. 2042/MUM/2023 held that Addition based on third party statement without tangible material is unsustainable. Hon’ble ITAT Bangalore in the case of Dr. Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru Vs ACIT ... offered by the assessee is not correct. The bench further noted that coordinate bench Mumbai in the case of Jitendra Udaylal Jain vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) in ITA No. 2042/Mum/2023 and in the case of Dr. Sreenivasulu Reddy Ponnaluru vs. ACIT in ITA No. 673/Chny/2022 have also held

Shree Samarth Constructions, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Deslhi

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

ITA 3369/MUM/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am Shree Samarth Constructions National Faceless Assessment Centre Room No. 7, Indira Nagar Kishan, North Block, Delhi-110 001 No.2 Opp. Balasara Co. Wagle Estate, Vs. Thane (W), Thane-400 604

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram - Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Shambhu Yadav
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, AM Shree Samarth Constructions National Faceless Assessment Centre Room No. 7, Indira Nagar Kishan, North Block, Delhi-110 001 No.2 Opp. Balasara Co. Wagle Estate, Vs. Thane (W), Thane-400 604 PAN/GIR No. ACGFS

Ramesh Jasubhai Patel, Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Ambawadi

ITA 438/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं / Ita Nos. 436 To 438/Ahd/2024 िनधा%रण वष%/Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16 बनाम Ramesh Jasubhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. A/7, Satkar Bungalow, Ward 4(2)(3), Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Gujarat-380061 Pan : Akspp 7877 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) िनधा%(रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Prakash D. Shah, Ar *+थ- की ओर से / Revenue By : Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(2)Section 250

reasons for delay which are summarised below: i. The assessee did not receive timely and proper communication of the orders passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) ITA No. 436 to 438/Ahd/2024 Ramesh Jasubhai Patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16 5 ii. The assessee

Ramesh Jasubhai Patel, Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Ambawadi

ITA 437/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं / Ita Nos. 436 To 438/Ahd/2024 िनधा%रण वष%/Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16 बनाम Ramesh Jasubhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. A/7, Satkar Bungalow, Ward 4(2)(3), Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Gujarat-380061 Pan : Akspp 7877 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) िनधा%(रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Prakash D. Shah, Ar *+थ- की ओर से / Revenue By : Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(2)Section 250

reasons for delay which are summarised below: i. The assessee did not receive timely and proper communication of the orders passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) ITA No. 436 to 438/Ahd/2024 Ramesh Jasubhai Patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16 5 ii. The assessee

Ramesh Jasubhai Patel, Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan Ambawadi

ITA 436/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member आयकर अपील सं / Ita Nos. 436 To 438/Ahd/2024 िनधा%रण वष%/Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16 बनाम Ramesh Jasubhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. A/7, Satkar Bungalow, Ward 4(2)(3), Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Gujarat-380061 Pan : Akspp 7877 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) िनधा%(रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Prakash D. Shah, Ar *+थ- की ओर से / Revenue By : Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(2)Section 250

reasons for delay which are summarised below: i. The assessee did not receive timely and proper communication of the orders passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) ITA No. 436 to 438/Ahd/2024 Ramesh Jasubhai Patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2015-16 5 ii. The assessee

Jitendra Salunke, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -42(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3365/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Poojan MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs 10,000 levied under section 272A(1)(d) of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as the NFAC). The appellant contends that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... order. 2. The CIT(A) erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs 14,282 levied under section 270A of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as the NFAC). The appellant contends that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Jitendra Salunke, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-42(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3362/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Poojan MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 147Section 250Section 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs 10,000 levied under section 272A(1)(d) of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as the NFAC). The appellant contends that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... order. 2. The CIT(A) erred in sustaining the penalty of Rs 14,282 levied under section 270A of the Act by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as the NFAC). The appellant contends that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

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