← All Phrases

“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
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.

Aggarwal v. NFAC
127 Taxmann.com 637 · High Court
34
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
34
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
32
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
21
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
14
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
13
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
11
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

Sujatabai Shesherao Bansode, Latur vs. ITO, Ward 4, Latur

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

ITA 950/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.950/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sujatabai Shesherao Vs. Ito, Ward-4, Latur. Bansode, Bhim Nagar Atp & Tq Ahmedpur, Latur- 413515. Pan : Aplpb6172Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.03.2024 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1] On The Facts & In The Circumstances The Learned Cit(A) Nfac Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing Appeal On The Ground That The Reasons For Delay Are Not Found To Be Satisfactory. 2] The Learned Cit(A) Has & On Facts In Not Appreciating That The Reasons For Delay Were Beyond The Control Of The Appellant & Were Genuine For Which The Delay Ought To Have Be Condoned & Appeal Ought To Have Decided On Merits.

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade
Section 10(37)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 96

year 2013-14. 2. The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1] On the facts and in the circumstances The Learned CIT(A) NFAC erred in law and on facts in not condoning the delay in filing appeal on the ground that the reasons for delay are not found ... terms and conditions are satisfied in this case. 5] On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. NFAC was not justified in brading the Return filed u/s139(4) filed on15.01.2014.The Return filed u/s 139(4) is also treated as return filed

Shweta Singh, Siliguri vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 8

ITA 14/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.14/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shweta Singh ………. Appellant 204, Tower No. 15, Mig Colony, Uttarayan, Matigara, Siliguri-734010. (Pan: Bndps2756J) Vs. Income Tax Officer ………… Respondent Ward-2(3), Siliguri, W.B. Appearances By: Shri Vikash Surana, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Addl. Cit Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 26.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 04.09.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 06.11.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Framed U/S. 143(3)/144 Of The Act By Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Siliguri Dated 11.12.2017. I.T.A. No. 14/Kol/2024 Shweta Singh, Ay : 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short the “Act”) by Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short Ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 06.11.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s. 143(3)/144 of the Act by Income ... 14/Kol/2024 Shweta Singh, AY : 2015-16 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A) - NFAC erred in confirming the addition made by A. O. Rs. 1357214 towards ' Undisclosed Investment' in purchase of land when the advance for purchase made during