“NFAC”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144BSection 144B48,618 judgments

The decision most relied on for NFAC is Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (174 Taxmann.com 1203), cited in 43 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on NFAC

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.

Aggarwal v. NFAC

127 Taxmann.com 637 · High Court

citing judgments

Denying a personal hearing when specifically requested, especially after a search and during a pandemic, violates the principles of natural justice. The assessment and appellate proceedings themselves were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hire Purchase (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC

128 Taxmann.com 190 · High Court

citing judgments

Failure to grant a personal hearing to an assessee when income is likely to be varied based on submitted evidence violates the principles of natural justice and renders the assessment order invalid.

Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP v. NFAC

142 Taxmann.com 38 · 2022 · High Court

citing judgments

When initiating penalty proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) must specify the limb of the charge, indicating whether the penalty is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. This requirement is essential for valid penalty proceedings.

Vinodkumar Lakshmipathi v. CIT (Appeals) NFAC

145 Taxmann.com 235 · 2022 · ITAT

citing judgments

The ITAT held that failure to file Form 67 by the due date for filing the return of income is not fatal to the claim for foreign tax credit. The appellate authority can condone the delay in filing Form 67.

Alrameez Construction (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC

152 Taxmann.com 382 · 2023 · ITAT

citing judgments

Penalty under Section 270A for under-reporting or mis-reporting of income cannot be sustained if additions are made under Section 56(2)(x) and the penalty notice fails to specify the limb under which proceedings are initiated.

Sanjay Gupta v. CIT

366 ITR 18 · 2014 · High Court

citing judgments

When the quantum of income is remanded to the Assessing Officer, the issue of penalty for undisclosed income should also be remanded to the Assessing Officer.

Saltwater Studio LLP v. NFAC

157 Taxmann.com 749 · 2023 · Reported

citing judgments

A penalty levied for misreporting under section 270A is unsustainable if the Assessing Officer fails to establish how the assessee's case falls within the specific instances of misreporting mentioned in section 270A(9). This requires an application of mind and adherence to the principles of natural justice.

Judgments citing NFAC

Shri Manoj Hemchand Mundaware, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2, Malegaon

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

ITA 1616/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Pune24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh ToshniwalFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.09.2023 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, relating to assessment year 2017-18. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order ... NFAC in confirming the action SA No.5/PUN/2024 of the Assessing Officer in making the addition of Rs.1,12,95,870/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 3. There is a delay of 320 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal

Income-Tax Officer Ward-2, Ahmednagar vs. Sanjivani Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Gurudwara Road, Kopargaon Dist. Ahmednagar. Pin-423601, Ahmednagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1280/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1280/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY

Shri Deepak Ambadas Nagargoje, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward 2, Ahmednagar(Jao), Ahmednagar

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

ITA 1218/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ketan DhootFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkende

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.04.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC relating to assessment year 2013-14. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC ... share of the assessee works out to Rs.1,02,12,720/-. 4. Since the assessee filed the appeal before the CIT(A) / NFAC with a delay of 3 months, he did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal. Further, he noted that the assessee failed to respond

Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Ahmednagar vs. Karmaveer Shankarrao Kale Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 1135/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mihir M Bapat (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri P R Mane

Section 143(1)Section 43B

hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 21.03.2019 making addition of Rs.9,58,23,576/-. 2 3. Before the CIT(A) / NFAC it was submitted that the Assessing Officer erred in not allowing deduction of Rs.9,38,05,094/- being excise duty paid on closing stock of finished goods ... unpaid on 31.03.2016 which was paid in assessment year 2017-18 and claimed as deduction. The complete details were furnished before the CIT(A) / NFAC and a certificate of Chartered Accountant certifying that such excise duty for assessment year 2016-17 has been paid in assessment year

N Sai Multi State Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Latur vs. ITO Ward 1 Latur, Latur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1110/PUN/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Girish Ladda (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

ORDER PER BENCH: The above 2 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 22.03.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2018-19 and 2020-21, respectively. Since identical grounds have been raised in both the appeals, therefore, for the sake ... number of grounds have been raised by the assessee in both these appeals, however, these all relate to the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the disallowance of Rs.1,40,26,680/- for assessment year 2018-19 and Rs.3,53,92,935/- for assessment year

N Sai Multi State Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Latur vs. ITO Ward 1 Latur, Latur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1109/PUN/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Girish Ladda (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Nitin Prabhakar Vaidya, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 1(5), Nagpur

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

ITA 67/NAG/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Sept 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:– “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) NFAC has erred in law by upholding the penalty of Rs.1,76,531/- levied on the assessee. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case ... NFAC has erred in law by upholding the penalty when there was no concealment of income nor any inaccurate particulars were submitted by the assessee.” 2 Nitin Prabhakar Vaidya ITA no.67/Nag./2024 When this appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the 3. assessee submitted that

Friends Timber Pvt. Ltd, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 120/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

framed is bad in law and liable to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2) The Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre ("NFAC") grossly erred in not adjudicating the ground challenging the legality of assessment despite the same having been taken and specifically argued. 2 Friends Timber ... no.120/Nag./2021 3) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO grossly erred in making and the CIT(A), NFAC grossly erred in confirming the additions made during assessment which were outside the scope of Limited Scrutiny. The additions made during assessment being outside

Chandra Gupta Basetty, Mancherial vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Manchirial

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

ITA 843/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.843/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Chandra Gupta Basetty Income Tax Officer Mancherial Vs. Ward-1 Mancherial [Pan : Aenpb6195G] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By : Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, Ar राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By : Shri Kumaran Ram, Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 23/09/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 24/09/2024 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M: Aggrieved By The Order Dated 28/03/2024 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Learned Cit(A)”), In The Case Of Chandra Gupta Basetty (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Year 2017-18, The Assessee Preferred This Appeal With A Delay Of 95 Days. 2. At The Outset Learned Ar Submits That The Learned Cit(A) Recorded That So Many Notices Were Issued & Because Of The Nonappearance Of The Assessee He Proceeded Ex-Parte & Dismissed The Appeal In Limine. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit & Submitted That The He Filed An Appeal Before The Learned Cit(A) Against The Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumaran Ram, DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 28/03/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Learned CIT(A)”), in the case of Chandra Gupta Basetty (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2017-18, the assessee preferred this appeal with a delay

Guthikonda Pradeep Kumar Reddy, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 825/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.825/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Guthikonda Pradeep Income Tax Officer Kumar Reddy Vs. Ward-9(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Anrpg7345N] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee By : Mohd.Afzal, Ar राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue By : Shri Kumaran Ram, Dr सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/09/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 24/09/2024 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M: Aggrieved By The Order Dated 17/03/2024 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Learned Cit(A)”), In The Case Of Guthikonda Pradeep Kumar Reddy (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Year 2017-18, The Assessee Preferred This Appeal With A Delay Of 465 Days. 2. At The Outset, Assessee Brought To My Notice That In Form No.35, The Assessee Requested Not To Communicate The Notices By Email By Specifically Noting So, But Inspite Of The Same, The Learned Cit(A) Sent The Notices To The Email Of The Assessee, Therefore, Miscommunication Happened & The Mail Sent By The Learned Cit(A) Escaped The Attention Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Mohd.Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumaran Ram, DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 17/03/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Learned CIT(A)”), in the case of Guthikonda Pradeep Kumar Reddy (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2017-18, the assessee preferred this appeal with

Sri Shiridi Sai Educational Society, Warangal vs. ITO., Ward-1, Warangal

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

ITA 703/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.703/Hyd/2024 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Sri Shiridi Sai Educational Ito, Ward-1 Society Vs. Warangal Warangal [Pan :Aanas9875P] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agarwala, DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 19/06/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Sri Shiridi Sai Educational Society (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2022-23, the assessee preferred this appeal

Minerva Natya Sanskriti Charcha Kendra, Beadon Street, Kolkata vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle37 Kolkata, Government Place

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 632/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: the Ld A.O. by post for send the copy of the Assessment Order that your assessee can submit the Appeal Petition against the demand notice. The Ld. A.O without mailing the said document handed over the Assessment Order hardcopy to your assessee authorized representative on 23 03.2021 and on orafter received the Assessment Order your appellant filed the appeal petition through online dtd. 19.04.2021.

Section 143(3)Section 250

passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the „Act‟) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax,National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi,dated I.T.A. No.632/Kol/2024 Minerva Natya Sanskriti Charcha Kendra 29.01.2024 arising out of Assessment Order dated 30.11.2019, passed under Section143

Samrat Kumar Ghosh, Darjeeling vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1495/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1495/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Samrat Kumar Ghosh……..…….…....…………….......…....………....Appellant Tumbe Jote, Matigara, Rabin Sen Colony, Darjeeling, W.B – 734010. [Pan: Aqepg2359J] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), Siliguri.......................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 24, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Lower Authorities In Making Addition Of Rs.55,53,171/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credits. 3. The Assessing Officer Found That There Were Cash Credits In The Bank Account Of The Assessee. However, The Assessee Could Not Give Satisfactory Explanation Regarding The Source Of The Said Cash Credits. Even The Assessee Did Not Reply To The Various Notices Issued By The Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer, Therefore, Made The Impugned

Section 144Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘सी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri

M/S. Philips India Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 1489/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 154Section 250

assessee submits that the present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ld. 'CIT(A)']. However, after the said order passed a rectification order has been passed ... Park, 08 Block, Rajarhat, New Town S.O., North 24 Parganas, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700156. 2. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. //// By order

M/S.Winwood Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Kolkata.

ITA 675/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 675/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Winwood Marketing Pvt. Limited,………Appellant 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aabcw3528M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-6(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Ankit Jalan, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Arun Kumar Meena, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 02, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 24, 2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 11th May, 2023 passed for Assessment Year 2012-13. 1 M/s. Winwood Marketing Pvt. Limited 2. The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Bhopal vs. Indus Education and Research Institute, Raipur

ITA 177/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

Sadhu Ram Balani, Indore vs. ITO-5(1), Indore

ITA 470/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Indore24 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisadhu Ram Balani Ito-5(1) Flat No.B-503, Moti Mahal Indore Apartment 28-A, Sector-C Vs. Scheme No.71, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abspb5367L Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2024

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 133A

This appeal by assessee is directed against the order dated 16.10.2020 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi, for A.Y.2014-15. The assesse has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Ranjithkumar Yogalakshmi, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-15(5), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1989/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1989/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Mrs. Ranjithkumar Yogalakshmi Ito बनाम/ #26, Seashell Avenue, Akkarai, Non-Corporate Ward-15(5) Vs. Chennai-600 119. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acppy-5709-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) - Ld. DR

Section 144

assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 30-05-2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Ld. AO on best judgment basis u/s 144 r.w.s

Ramasamy Kandasamy, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Namakkal

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1954/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Senthil Kumar (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR

Section 147

assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 12-03-2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) on best judgment basis u/s 147 r.w.s

Harish Kumar, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-2(1), Coimbatore

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1942/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1942/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Harish Kumar Ito बनाम/ 123-2, K K Garden, Non-Corporate Ward-2(1), Manlyakaranpalayam, Ganapathy, Coimbatore. Vs. Coimbatore-641 006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Awhpc-4931-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri G. Tarun (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G. Tarun (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR

Section 144

assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 06-10-2023 in the matter of assessment framed by the Ld. AO on best judgment basis