“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

ITO, Ward - 2(1), Mangaluru vs. M/S S. K & Udupi District Co-Operative Fish Marketing Federation Limited, Mangaluru

ITA 38/PAN/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.38 To 43/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

short] which ascended out of respective orders of assessment passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Mangalore & National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [‘AO’ for short] for the different assessment years [‘AY’ for short]. ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation

ITO-41(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Keyur Dilip Parekh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 1187/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 271(1)(c)

dated 10/02/2023 for A.Y. 2012-13 which was filed against the penalty order under section 271(1)(c) dated 01.12.2021 by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). 2. During the course of hearing, it is noticed that the tax effect to the impugned appeal is Rs.65,546/- and therefore the bench

Kgk Homes, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jaipur

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

ITA 223/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CA &For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

JAIPUR -1, JAIPUR 1. Case of the assessee firm, was selected for “complete scrutiny”, for the year under consideration, by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (“NFAC”) and order dated 15.03.2021, was passed, under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“ITA”). In the said order, passed by NFAC

College Shoes, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-49(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3035/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediai.T.A. No.3035/Del/2022 Assessment Year 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee reads as under: “1. That the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO)(CPC) and consequently the Ld. National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC") have grossly erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the appellant's case in proposing and sustaining an addition ... Income Tax Act, 1961. 3035/Del/2022 2 2. That the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO)(CPC) and consequently the Ld National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) has failed to appreciate that the assessee has not routed these expenses through its profit loss account. 3) That the Ld. Officer (AO' (CPC) and consequently

Mikuni India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Circle-1, Alwar

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 87/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

time of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted, since, the final assessment order was passed AY: 2017-18 by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, the assessee has filed the present appeal in the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal. He submitted, as per the standing order ... appeal under a bona fide belief that the appeal is maintainable in Delhi Benches, since the final assessment order was passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, we grant liberty to the assessee to file a fresh appeal before the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal along with application seeking condonation

Hotel Gokul Lunch Home, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2853/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.2853/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2018-19) Hotel Gokul Lunch Home, 10, Nawaz Building, Tulloch Road, Colaba, Mumbai 400 039. Pan: Aaafh-3678-K ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre Mumbai. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Praveen B. Shetty ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Smt. Anne Varghese, Sr.Ar सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/04/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/05/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Praveen B. ShettyFor Respondent: Smt. Anne Varghese, Sr.AR

Section 68

Gokul Lunch Home, 10, Nawaz Building, Tulloch Road, Colaba, Mumbai 400 039. PAN: AAAFH-3678-K ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre Mumbai. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri Praveen B. Shetty ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent by : Smt. Anne Varghese, Sr.AR सुनवाई

Ravi Gopal Trivedy, Mumbai vs. National-Eassessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 358/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2023AY 2014-2015

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

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

Centre (NFAC) has erred in confirming the 2 ITA 358/Mum/2023 Ravi Gopal Trivedy issue of the reassessment notice and order passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre. 1.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. NFAC has erred in confirming the notice under ... NFAC has erred in making an addition of Rs. 17,40,120/- without providing the details of the said amount arrived by the National Faceless Assessment Centre. 3 ITA 358/Mum/2023 Ravi Gopal Trivedy 2.4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. NFAC

Sulzer Pumps India P. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Addl./Jt/Dy/ Asstt/ ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 810/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd V. Addl./Joint/Dy./Acit/Ito Plot No. 9, Midc, Digha National E-Assessment Centre Delhi Thane-Belapur Road, Navi Mumbai- 400708 Pan: Aaack2238F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd V. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi Plot No. 9, Midc, Digha Thane-Belapur Road Navi Mumbai- 400708 Pan: Aaack2238F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144C(5)Section 37(1)Section 40

Digha National e-Assessment Centre Delhi Thane-Belapur Road, Navi Mumbai- 400708 PAN: AAACK2238F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Sulzer Pumps India Pvt Ltd v. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi Plot No. 9, MIDC, Digha Thane-Belapur Road Navi Mumbai- 400708 PAN: AAACK2238F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri S Sriram

Jansevak Co-Op Credit Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 27(1)(5), Mumbai

ITA 639/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2023AY 2014-15

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

brevity) inter-alia that:- “Being aggrieved by the order dated 27.01.2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ["Ld. CIT(A)"] u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("Act"), your appellant prefers this appeal, among others, on the following

Jansevak Co-Op Credit Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 27(1)(5), Mumbai

ITA 638/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2023AY 2015-16

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Rajesh Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. DCIT 1, C.R. Building, Jaipur, Rajasthan

ITA 126/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: The Date Of Hearing Of Appeal.” 3. Succinctly, The Fact As Culled Out From The Records Is That The Return Of Income In This Case Was E-Filed On 29.11.2012 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.

For Appellant: Smt. Suhani Meharwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

which in turn arise from the order dated 07.01.2022 passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi(NeFAC). 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - 2 Rajesh Kumar Agarwal vs. DCIT “1. Ground 1: On the facts

M/S Rajendra Agri Products P Ltd, Indore vs. DCIT (TDS), Bangaluru

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 121/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanirajendra Agri Product P. Dcit Ltd. Cpc Banglore Vs. 302, Royal House,11/13 Usha Ganj Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcr 3053 L Assessee By Ms. Shreya Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.04.2023

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 192BSection 194CSection 40Section 43B

assessee was subsequently, selected for scrutiny and Ld. AO has already passed scrutiny assessment order u/s 143(3) on 24.02.2021 by National Faceless Assessment Centre. A copy of the assessment order has been filed by the Ld. AR of the assesse. Considering the facts that the case of the assessee

Smt. Rajinder Kaur, Hoshiarpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Dasuya

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

have been initiated since assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s. 263 of the Act has been made by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (NFAC) vide order dated 28.03.2022. Assessee was further informed that appeal against assessment order is required to be filed and assessee is also entitled to question the order

Kavungal Vareed Itteera, Kerala vs. ACIT, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 855/COCH/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Padmavathy S, Accountant Member: This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order dated 13.06.2022 of the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [NFAC] in relation to Assessment Year 2020-21. The only issue involved in this appeal is disallowance of PF/ESI. 2. The assessee

Intercontinental Hotels Group (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 505/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Atul Jain, AR &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)

r.w.s. 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 27 January 2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (‘Ld. AO’) read with rectification order u/s 154 r.w.s, 143(3) of the Act dated 23 August 2022. 7 Inter Continental Hotels Group

Manju Saran, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 7(1), Jpr, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 423/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia (CA) &For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271BSection 274

assessment year 2017-18 dated 10.10.2022, which in turn arises from the order passed by 2 Manju Saran the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) Delhi passed under Section 271B of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') dated 28.12.2021. 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on following

Bmw India Financial Services P.Ltd, Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 562/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 478/Del/2022 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 562/Del/2022 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Bmw India Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 1St Floor, Building No. 11, The Oberoi Circle-10(1), Corporate Tower, Dlf Cyber City, Delhi Phase-2, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcb8986G Assessee By : Sh. Ajit Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.02.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Ajit Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 40aSection 43Section 92C

case and in law, the Honourable Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Hon’ble DRP’), the Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (‘Ld. TPO’) and the National Faceless Assessment Centre / Assessing Officer ITA Nos. 478 & 562/Del/2022 2 BMW India Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter collectively to be referred as “Revenue”) erred in making an adjustment ... case and in law, the Honourable Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Hon’ble DRP), the Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (‘Ld. TPO’) and the National Faceless Assessment Centre / Assessing Officer (hereinafter collectively to be referred as “Revenue”) erred in making an adjustment of INR 12,603,272 to the total income

Bmw India Financial Services Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 478/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. Ajit Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 40aSection 43Section 92C

Share India Fincap Private Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-22(2), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1571/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 5(2)Section 6

BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 11.05.2022, pertaining to the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. 1. That the appellant prays that

M/S Piramal Enterprises Limiited, Mumbsi vs. Dy CIT(Appeal)-Range-8(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 727/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Piramal Enterprises Ltd., Dy. Cit, Mumbai-8(1)(2), Or Piramal Tower, Agastya National Facelss Assessment Vs. Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Centre, Delhi, Kamani Junction, Kurla Room No. 624, 6Th Floor, (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400070. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacn 4538 P Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ronak Doshi : Revenue By Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Cit-Dr & Mr. Samuel Pitta, Dr : Date Of Hearing 17/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/12/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Ronak Doshi

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)

PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee has been preferred against final assessment order dated 26.02.2022 passed by the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commission/Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (in short ‘the M/s Piramal Enterprises Ltd. 2 Ld. Assessing Officer’ or ‘AO’) for assessment year Ld. Assessing Officer ... procedures and processes for effective down the standards, procedures and processes for effective down the standards, procedures and processes for effective functioning of National Faceless Assessment Centre and ctioning of National Faceless Assessment Centre and ctioning of National Faceless Assessment Centre and others, inter alia, circumstances in which personal hearing