← 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

Cadmatic Oy, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Tax), Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 540/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 195

rulings of Hon'ble ITAT and High Courts in several cases. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of SRF Ltd. v. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [2021] 129 taxmann.com 174 (Delhi) has held that where objections to draft assessment order filed by assessee were pending disposal with

Boeing India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 802/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 234ASection 92

facts, in circumstances of the case & in law, the final assessment order passed by Ld. Assessing Officer (‘Ld.AO') of the National Faceless Assessment Centre ('NaFAC') under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Income

Ghevarchand M. Surana, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Thane

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

ITA 2641/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sshrighevarchand.M.Surana Vs Ito-Ward-2(4), 203, B-3, Sector-4, Ashar It Park, Mira Road (E), 6Th Floor, Road No. Thane-401107, 16Z, Wagle Maharashtra. Industrial Estate, Thane-400604. Maharashtra. Pan/Gir No. : Aajps6676B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Shashank Mehta.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Joginder Singh.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

following grounds of appeal: Ghevarchand M Surana, Mumbai. 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. National Faceless Assessment Centre - CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer of completing the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 without providing

Hitachi Astemo Haryana Private Limited (Formerly Showa India Private Limited), Faridabad vs. DCIT, Circle-22(2), Delhi

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

ITA 1005/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandrahitachi Astemo Haryana Private Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle 22 (2), (Formerly Showa India Private Ltd.), Delhi. Plot No.23-32, Sector 58, Behind Jcb India Ltd., Faridabad – 121 002 (Haryana). (Pan : Aabce5725G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Shri Akshay Uppal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit Dr Shri Manu Chaurasia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2023 Date Of Order : 23.11.2023

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 270ASection 92C

Private Limited) (hereinafter referred to as 'Hitachi Astemo or 'Appellant') craves leave to prefer an appeal against 2 the order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "NFAC" or "AO"] pursuant to directions issued by the Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel [hereinafter referred

Bsc C&C Joint Venture, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-61(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2283/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 801A(4)(i)Section 80I

account of interest on advance given to BSC C&C JV Nepal Ltd. The Ld. Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (“FAO”) 3 proceeded to frame draft order under section 144C of the Act. He computed the total income of the assessee

Sri Harikuttan T, Kayamkulam vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2, Alleppey

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

ITA 885/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember Harikuttan T. The Income Tax Officer (2) 1, Edayilaveetil Tharayil Aayakar Bhavan Njakkanal P.O., Pathiyoor Vs. Alappuzha Co0Llectorate Kayalmulam 690533 Alappuzha 688011 [Pan:Alrpt7536J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri M.S. Venkitachalam, Ca Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing:08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement:03.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By Assessee Challenging The Confirmation Of Penalty Levied Under Section 270A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Vide Order Dated 17/02/2022, By The First Appellate Authority, Being The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Nfac [Cit(A)] Vide It’S Order Dated 06.07.2022. 2.1 The Brief Background Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, A Retired Defence Personnel, Is A Registered Money Lender Under The Kerala Money Lenders Act (Kml Act), Lending Money On Interest Against Mortgage Of Loan. For The Relevant Year He Returned, Besides Pension, Income From This Business At Rs.2,05,691. On Verification, It Was Found By The Assessing Officer (Ao) That The Assessee Was Maintaining Six Bank Accounts, I.E., Three Each With Two Banks, Being South Indian Bank (Sib) & State Bank Of India (Sbi). Transactions With The Former Were Undisclosed. The Reason Explained Was That The Gold Pawned By His Customers With Him For Availing Loan, Was In Turn Mortgaged With This Bank To Source Funds For Further Lending. These

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Venkitachalam, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 270ASection 274Section 37(1)

assessment order, making the reliance on the said decision misplaced, both on facts and in law. (ii) In Ultimate Infratech (P) Ltd. vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre [2022] 213 DTR 249 (Del), the question was whether the assessee could be denied immunity u/s. 270AA

Siemens Technology and Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC/ DCIT 8(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 92C

BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.588/Mum/2022A (Assessment year : 2017-18) Siemens Technology and Services vs National Faceless Assessment Centre Pvt Ltd, Plot No.2, Kharghar Node / Deputy Commissioner of Income- Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra – 410 tax 8(2)(1), Mumbai, Room No.624, 6th Floor ... pronouncement 27/10/2023 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S (AM): This appeal is against the final order of assessment passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (in short, the AO‟) under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act (in short, „the Act‟) dated

Greenwoods Govt. Officers Welfare Society, Noida vs. DCIT Circle 52(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 609/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.D. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270A

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi (“CIT(A)”) whereby he sustained the penalty of Rs. 58,88,954/- imposed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (“AO”) upon the assessee under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) pertaining to Assessment year

Delhi Policy Group (Reg), New Delhi vs. ITO(E), Ward 1(3), Delhi

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

ITA 191/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 34

following grounds of appeal:- “1. That the order dated 28.11.2022 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("Act") by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ("Ld. CIT(A)"), upholding the addition of Rs. 54,03,420 by an order u/s 154 of the Act and the resultant demand

M/S. Portfolio Fashions Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT (A), Delhi

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

ITA 1241/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Portfolio Fashions Pvt. Ltd., V. Cit (A) 5A, Jindal Mansion Delhi Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg Mumbai - 400026 Pan: Aadcp7858D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Hiro Rai Department Represented By : Shri H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(2)

given to the petitioner so as to enable the petitioner to give explanation for proposed addition during the hearing before the National Faceless Assessment Centre. Section 144B(1)(xii) provides that on receipt of show cause notice, assessee may furnish his response to the National Faceless Assessment Centre ... clause (xiv), assessment unit shall make a revised draft assessment order after considering the response of the assessee and send it to the National Faceless Assessment Centre. As per the provisions of Section 1448(7) in case of variation prejudicial to the assessee as proposed in the draft assessment order

Teradata India Pvt Ltd, Grugram vs. DCIT Circle-3(1), Gurugram

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

ITA 2337/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80G

Transfer Pricing Officer - 1(3)(2). New Delhi (the Learned TPO"), the draft assessment order and the final assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ("Learned AO") pursuant to the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel 1, New Delhi ("Hon'ble DRP"), are bad in law and contrary ... Transfer Pricing Officer - 1(3)(2). New Delhi ("the Learned TPO"), the draft assessment order and the final assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ("Leamed AO") pursuant to the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel 1, New Delhi ("Hon'ble DRP"), are bad in law and contrary

ACIT-Circle-3(1), Gurgaon vs. Teradata India Private Limited, Gurgaon

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

ITA 1430/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80G

Transfer Pricing Officer - 1(3)(2). New Delhi (the Learned TPO"), the draft assessment order and the final assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ("Learned AO") pursuant to the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel 1, New Delhi ("Hon'ble DRP"), are bad in law and contrary ... Transfer Pricing Officer - 1(3)(2). New Delhi ("the Learned TPO"), the draft assessment order and the final assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ("Leamed AO") pursuant to the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel 1, New Delhi ("Hon'ble DRP"), are bad in law and contrary

Teradata India P.Ltd, Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Gurugram

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for AY 2018-19

ITA 1248/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 80G

Transfer Pricing Officer - 1(3)(2). New Delhi (the Learned TPO"), the draft assessment order and the final assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ("Learned AO") pursuant to the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel 1, New Delhi ("Hon'ble DRP"), are bad in law and contrary ... Transfer Pricing Officer - 1(3)(2). New Delhi ("the Learned TPO"), the draft assessment order and the final assessment order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ("Leamed AO") pursuant to the directions of Dispute Resolution Panel 1, New Delhi ("Hon'ble DRP"), are bad in law and contrary

Prem Kumar Goutam, Lakhisarai vs. ITO Ward- 2 (5), Lakhisarai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 156/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 115BSection 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 270ASection 44ASection 69CSection 80C

Kumar Goutam,............................. Appellant C/o. Ramakant Prasad Singh, P.O. Katehar, Surajgarha, Lakhisarai, Bihar-811106 [PAN:AWTPG1304L] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,......Respondent Delhi, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Appearances by: Shri Samit Kumar, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf ... Copies to :(1) Prem Kumar Goutam, C/o. Ramakant Prasad Singh, P.O. Katehar, Surajgarha, Lakhisarai, Bihar-811106 (2) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 5 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Prem Kumar Goutam (3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi; (4) Commissioner

Shri Chhitubhi Jagubhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 224/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.224/Srt/2023 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Physical Court) Chhitubhai Jagubhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward- Kanbi Faliya, At & Po Kholwad, 1(2)(1), Surat, Aaykar Vs Taluka, Kamrej, Surat-394109 Bhavan, Room No.121, 1St Pan No. Brlpp 7388 D Floor, Nr. Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat- 395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(14)Section 254(1)Section 50C

NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 20.03.2023 for the assessment year 2014-15, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi / Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for the sake of brevity

DCIT, Bhilai vs. Bhilai Jaypee Cement Limited, Durg

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 258/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.258/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Dcit Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd. Bhilai Bhilai Township, Bhilai Bhilai Durg – 490006 Chhattisgarh [Pan: Aadcb 1675 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By Shri R. B. Dhoshi ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.09.2023 : घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 25.09.2023

For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma
Section 147

ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi dated 08.05.2023 which in turn arises from the order by Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act dated

M/S Celio Future Fashion Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/CIT/Dy/Asstt/ITO/NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 741/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sumant ChadhaFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 69CSection 920Section 92C

Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act)-Tax effect Rs.11,67,806. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, learned Assessing Officer (National Faceless Assessment Centre) and Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) has erred both in law as well on facts in making adjustment M/s. Celio Future Fashion

Ntt India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/Tax/ITO, Delhi

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

ITA 722/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ntt India Pvt. Ltd. Addl/Jt/Dy./Acit/Tax/Ito 1701-1704, B-Wing, One Bkc Level, National Faceless Assessment Centre 17 G Block, Plot No. C-65, Vs. Delhi Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaacd 2145 G (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta : Shri Sunil A Umap & Revenue By Shri Samuel Pitta Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2023 : 04.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)

SHRI B R BASKARAN, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM NTT India Pvt. Ltd. Addl/JT/Dy./ACIT/Tax/ITO 1701-1704, B-Wing, One BKC Level, National Faceless Assessment Centre 17 G Block, Plot No. C-65, Vs. Delhi Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACD 2145 G (Appellant

Shobhanaben Navinbhai Sorathia, Surat vs. Add./Jt.Deputy/Asst.CIT, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 424/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.424/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shobhanaben Navinbhai National Faceless Assessment Sorathia Centre, Delhi / Income Tax Vs. 2-19396-B, Sai Place, B/H Officer, Ward-3(2)(8), Surat Shubh Sankalp Apartment, Kailash Nagar, Sagrampura, Surat-395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bdups 1425 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tinish R Mody, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’ for short] dated 24.05.2023, which in turn arises out of penalty order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi / Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’), dated 23.02.2022. 2. The grounds

Gemological Institute of America Inc., Mumbai vs. ACIT(It) Cir. 2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 647/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blegemological Institute Of America, Inc. V. Acit (International Taxation) C/O Gia India Laboratory Pvt. Ltd Circle-2(3)(2) 10Th Floor, Trade Centre 17Th Floor, Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E) Mumbai- 400098 Pan: Aadcg7962K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. J.D. Mistry, Shri Niraj Sheth & Shri Ketan Ved Department Represented By Shri Hement Kumar C. Leuva :

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

struck down as such. 2:2 The Appellant submits that the Notice u/s. 143(2) of the ITA has been issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre ("NaFAC") which did not have the jurisdiction to assess the Appellant and hence, the whole proceedings and the consequential Order