← 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

Rockwell Collins (India) Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 340/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 340/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rockwell Collins (India) Enterprises Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited. Bangalore Vs. Income Tax [Pan : Aadcr7773H] Circle-3(1) Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Sri Nageswar Rao, Ld.Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Sri Madan Mohan Meena, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/08/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 27/08/2024 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M: Aggrieved By The Order Dated 08/02/2024 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), In The Case Of Rockwell Collins (India) Enterprises Private Limited (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Year 2017- 18, Assessee Preferred This Appeal. 2. At The Outset, The Ld.Ar Brought To The Notice Of The Bench That The Assessee Only Withdrew The Appeal Partially That Too Except Grounds No. 9

For Appellant: Sri Nageswar Rao, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 08/02/2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Rockwell Collins (India) Enterprises Private Limited (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2017- 18, assessee preferred this appeal

Adarsh Global Trades and Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 267/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.267 /Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Adarsh Global Trades & Services Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited Vs. Income Tax- 1 Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aakca7278H] अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Sri Prabhat Sharma, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Sri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 27/08/2024 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M: Aggrieved By The Order Dated 08/11/2023 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), In The Case Of Aadarsh Global Trades & Services Private Limited (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19, Assessee Preferred This Appeal. 2. At The Outset, The Ld.Ar Submitted That This Is The Appeal Against The Penalty Confirmed By The Ld.Cit(A), But The Quantum Appeal Is Still Pending Before The Ld.Cit(A), Therefore, In The Fitness Of Things, This Matter

For Appellant: Sri Prabhat Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Sri Srinath Sadanala, DR

NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 08/11/2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Aadarsh Global Trades & Services Private Limited (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2018-19, assessee preferred this appeal

Sri Vasavi Kala Mandir, Bobbili vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 107/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.107/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Sri Vasavi Kala Mandir, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, D.No. 2/16, Main Road, Ward-1, Bobbili, Vizianagaram Dist, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh – 535558. Andhra Pradesh-535002. Pan: Aaifs2687P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 27/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 69A

filed by the assessee is against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC”] in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060304354(1), dated 31/01/2024 arising out of the order passed U/s. 144 of the Income ... dated 24/12/2019. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. 3. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC after considering the submissions made by the assessee observed that the assessee has not been able to file any concrete reasons