← 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

Jagdish Prashad Gupta, Muzaffarnagar vs. JCIT Range 1(1), Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3822/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Jagdish Prashad Gupta, Vs. Jcit, 580/227, Bhartiya Colony, Range 1(1), New Mandi, Muzaffarnagar. Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh – 251 001. Pan: Ahbpg9897R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Shweta Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025

For Appellant: Ms Shweta Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 269SSection 271DSection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Cbre South Asia Private Limited, Delhi vs. Additional, Joint, Deputy, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 2282/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Cbre South Asia Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Additional, Joint, Deputy, Assistant Pti Building, 4, Ground Floor, Commissioner Of Income Tax, Parliament Street Central Delhi, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Parliament House, New Delhi Delhi Pin: 1100 01 Pan :Aaacc9308A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 251Section 40A(7)Section 41Section 43A

CBRE South Asia Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Additional, Joint, Deputy, Assistant PTI Building, 4, Ground Floor, Commissioner of Income Tax, Parliament Street Central Delhi, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Parliament House, New Delhi Delhi PIN: 1100 01 PAN :AAACC9308A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Kshitij Bansal & Ms. Supriya Mehta, CAs Department

Kirti Tripathi, Bhopal vs. ITO 2(4), Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 572/IND/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148

order by logging the online income tax portal. 7. That the delay in filing the appeal against ex-parte order passed by Ld. National Faceless Assessment Centre is completely unintentional and due to a genuine communication lapse on the part of the consultant. J ETHER prayed, that the delay

Venkata Prasad Pulipati, Amaravathi vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 612/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.612/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Venkata Prasad Pulipati, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Amaravathi. Ward-2(1), Pan: Asapp8796L Guntur. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri I. Kama Sastry, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 30Section 69

invalid as the same is issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer i.e., Income- tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur, instead of the National Faceless Assessment Centre. 5. The Notice issued under section 148 dated 27.07.2022 is invalid as the same is issued without DIN and the reasons for not being ... provided to the assessee along with the order under section 148A(d) as mandated by the CBDT Guidelines. 7. The National Faceless Assessment Centre is not justified in treating the entire consideration of Rs.11,55,505 as long term capital gains without giving any deduction towards cost of acquisition

Vulli Radhakrishna, Tuni vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tuni

ITA 359/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.359/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vulli Radhakrishna, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Tuni. Ward-1, Pan: Aegpv1751H Tuni. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 04/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 19/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 17/03/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short “A.O.”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 26/03/2022 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2 Vulli Radhakrishna Vs. Ito

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 69A

reassessment order in the present case under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 26/02/2022, has been passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi, i.e., by the 5 Vulli Radhakrishna vs. ITO Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), therefore, the same is invalid and is liable

Amara Raja Energy and Mobility Limited, Tirupati vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Tirupati

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 791/HYD/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.791/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Amara Raja Energy & Mobility Limited, The Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs. Tirupati – 517 520. Tirupati Pan Aabca9264E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca E Phalguna Kumar राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Pavan Kumar Beerla, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA E Phalguna KumarFor Respondent: Sri Pavan Kumar Beerla, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

Amara Raja Campus, Renigunta-cuddapah Road, Karakambadi, TIRUPATI DISTRICT-517520, Andhra Pradesh, India To THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER Assessment Unit/Verification Unit/Technical Unit/Review Unit National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department DELHI Dear Sir, Sub: Response to Notice under Sec 142(1) 1. Notice under Sec 142(1) with No. ITBA/AST/F

Laxmi Gupta, Darjeeling vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(2), Darjeeling

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2319/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250Section 56

correct and it is invalid as the provisions of section 151A of the Act were notified on 29.03.2022. Therefore, the assessment framed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi is invalid and bad in law and may be quashed. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision ... dated 04.07.2025. 5. Therefore, the above decision of the coordinate Bench held that the assessment framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre is without jurisdiction and is invalid. Accordingly, Ground No. 4 is allowed. 5. Since the facts and issues involved in this appeal is identical, except difference in figures

Laxmi Gupta, Darjeeling vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(2), Darjeeling

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2318/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250Section 56

correct and it is invalid as the provisions of section 151A of the Act were notified on 29.03.2022. Therefore, the assessment framed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi is invalid and bad in law and may be quashed. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision ... dated 04.07.2025. 5. Therefore, the above decision of the coordinate Bench held that the assessment framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre is without jurisdiction and is invalid. Accordingly, Ground No. 4 is allowed. 5. Since the facts and issues involved in this appeal is identical, except difference in figures

Trinity Enclave P. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1728/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: demonetisation period.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

arguments at the time of hearing by the counsel of the assessee was that notice was issued on 15.03.2022 by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi to show cause as to why proposed addition should not be made. However, we note that the National Faceless Assessment Centre was not having

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Jct Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal for the revenue for the A

ITA 2146/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 144BSection 147Section 254

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 serve a notice on the assessee under sub-section (2) of section 143; (ii) the assessee may, within fifteen days from the date ... receipt of notice referred to in clause (i), file his response to the National Faceless Assessment Centre; (iii) where the assessee- (a) has furnished his return of income under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142 or under sub-section

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-28, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Jct Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal for the revenue for the A

ITA 2145/DEL/2025[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 144BSection 147Section 254

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 serve a notice on the assessee under sub-section (2) of section 143; (ii) the assessee may, within fifteen days from the date ... receipt of notice referred to in clause (i), file his response to the National Faceless Assessment Centre; (iii) where the assessee- (a) has furnished his return of income under section 139 or in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142 or under sub-section

Assam Valley Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd, Guwahati vs. D.C.I.T., Circle 1, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 75/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm Assam Valley Finance & Dcit, Circle 1 Investment Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, Christian Basti, House No.1, Niligiri Path, G.S Road, Guwahati-781005, Vs. Zoo Road, Guwahati-781024 Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca6974B Assessee By : Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 68

rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the assessment has been framed by the National Faceless assessment Centre, Delhi vide order dated 29.03.2022, passed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Act. We note that notice ... with effect from 01.11.2020 which was notified on 29.03.2022 vide notification no.18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022-TPL(Part)]. Therefore, the assessment proceedings were taken by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi by issuing notice u/s 142(1) dated 09.02.2022 and thereafter the assessment was framed accordingly after issuing show cause notice which

Eaton Power Quality Private Limited, Puducherry vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Puducherry

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 231/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 92C

being forwarded to the assessee, the assessing officer and the TPO. The assessing officer referred to therein is the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. The petitioner has placed on record a communication from the Secretary and ACIT to the DRP. The said communication states that the assessing officer ... captioned case is the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi and that a scanned copy of the proceedings was uploaded to the National Faceless Assessment Centre on 17.06.2022. 7. From the above discussion, the conclusion that emerges is that the directions of the DRP were forwarded to the assessing officer

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Hirehal Jairaj Balram, Bengaluru

ITA 1961/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: FixedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. T. Srinivasa, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 250Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY

Corteva Agriscience Seeds Pvt Ltd Tax (Formerly Known As Phi Seeds Pvt Ltd.), Telangana vs. ACIT, Circle 19(1), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2575/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Smt. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92C

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

Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chaapeheda vs. Neac, Delhi

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

ITA 56/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

Rajgarh, asked the assessee to pay the outstanding demand. The Ld. CIT(A), however, observed that the assessment order was passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre and was duly served electronically on the e-filing portal in accordance with section 282A of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) held that

Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chaapeheda, Chhapiheda vs. Neac, Delhi

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

ITA 55/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

Rajgarh, asked the assessee to pay the outstanding demand. The Ld. CIT(A), however, observed that the assessment order was passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre and was duly served electronically on the e-filing portal in accordance with section 282A of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) held that

Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Chaapeheda vs. Neac, Delhi

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

ITA 54/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijaywargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 270ASection 272A(1)(d)

Rajgarh, asked the assessee to pay the outstanding demand. The Ld. CIT(A), however, observed that the assessment order was passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre and was duly served electronically on the e-filing portal in accordance with section 282A of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) held that

M/S. Devisha Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 5782/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 282ASection 41(1)

Bombay High Court in case of Madhuri Sameer Gokhale vs. Addl. Joint/ Deputy Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre [2025] 172 taxmann.com 696 (Bombay) and also on the decision of Cheftalk Food and Hospitality Services (P) Ltd v. Income Tax Officer [2024] 165 taxmann.com

M/S. Devisha Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 5781/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 282ASection 41(1)

Bombay High Court in case of Madhuri Sameer Gokhale vs. Addl. Joint/ Deputy Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax/ Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre [2025] 172 taxmann.com 696 (Bombay) and also on the decision of Cheftalk Food and Hospitality Services (P) Ltd v. Income Tax Officer [2024] 165 taxmann.com