“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

St. Marys Matriculation Hr.Sec. School, Cuddalore vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

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

ITA 1541/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1541/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. St. Marys Matriculation – The Ito (Exemptions), Hr. Sec. School, Ward-2, (The Educational Institute Of The Chennai. Sisters Of St. Joseph Of Cluny), Old Hospital Road, Sorkalpet, Cuddalore – 607 001. [Pan: Aacas 7855 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT

Section 11

Rs.1,01,06,776/- by order dated 30.03.2015. The assessee immediately filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) which appeal was transferred to the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) and the notices were issued to the e-mail of the Ld.AR, Mr.Daniel Selvaraj, CA, who was not well-versed with

Syniverse Technologies Services (India) Private Ltd., Haryana vs. ACIT Tp-1(3)(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)

High Court in the aforenoted paragraphs of Vodafone Idea and in Shell India Markets Private Limited v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre & Ors. The relevant paragraph of the decision in Shell India are extracted herein below: “10. Sub-section (131 of Section 144C. therefore ... additionally stated to have been dispatched through Speed Post to the third respondent (TPO) and the fourth respondent (Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi) on 27 June 2022. It is thereafter that the TPO appears to have passed the order dated 25 July

Ranjay Developers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-14(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is restored back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer with the direction to the assessee to furnish the necessary details before the Assessing

ITA 308/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shrisunil Kumar Singh, Jm A.Y.2011-12

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 68

facts and circumstances of the case, and in Law the Additional / Joint/ Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, The AO erred reopening the assessment of the appellant under section 147 of the assessment without fresh tangible material . The A erred in reopening ... facts and circumstances of the case, and in Law, the Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi the AO erred in making the addition as unexplained cash credit us 68 of Rs 2,75,00,000 by treating amount received

The Farmers Service Co-Operative Limited, Srikakulam vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Srikakulam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 166/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.166/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Farmers Service Co-Operative Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-1, Srikakulam. Srikakulam. Pan: Aabtt4377L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri I. Kama Sastry, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 14/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

justified in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 22,64,026/- made by the AO U/s. 80P(2)(a)(i)”. 2. The Assessment unit National Faceless Assessment Centre is not justified in taking Rs. 48,34,258/- as business income of the assessee and determining the taxable income

Ashok Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. PCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1394/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

vide order dated 26.12.2016. The impugned re-assessment order was passed by the Addl./Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 24.03.2022. 2. This appeal by assessee is arising out of revision order passed by the PCIT

Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. I.T.O., -2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4811/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

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

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (National Faceless Appeals Centre) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer (National Faceless Assessment Centre), in making an addition of Rs. 61,32,83,863/- under section 69 of the Act.” 10. We have heard the Ld. AR on behalf

Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4755/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 144rSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Maulana Azad Alpsankhyank Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 4755/MUM/2023, ITA No

ITA 4751/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan & & Maulana Azad Alpasankhyank Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Arthik Vikas Mahamandal Maryadit 2(2)(3), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, D. D. Building, Shahid Room No. 542, Ayakar Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai – Bhavan, Maharshi Karve 400 023. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – Pan: Aadcm6528R 400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Mr. Ganesh Ayodhyaprasad Jaiswal, Nanded vs. Assessing Officer, Ward-1, Nanded

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 730/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

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

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

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)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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