← 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

P P Pandurang Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Nashik vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

ITA 854/PUN/2024[Assessment year 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.854/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 P P Pandurang Gramin V The Assessment Unit, Bigarsheti Sahakari S Income Tax Department, Patsanstha Maryadit, Delhi. 1, Ramnagar, Niphad, Maharashtra – 422001. Pan: Aaaap7456J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ganesh Budruk – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], U/Sec.250 Of The Act Dated 12.03.2024.The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Prevailing Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit Appeal, Erred In Disallowing The Deduction Of Rs.41,65,363/- On Account Of Interest Income Earned Out Of Fixed Deposit With Cooperative/ Nationalised Bank & Which Is Eligible For P P Pandurang Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit [A]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], u/sec.250 of the Act dated 12.03.2024.The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case

Shri Bhushan Bhagwant Shinde, Pune vs. ITO-(It) Wrd-14(3), Pune

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

ITA 750/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.750/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri P.D. KudvaFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep P. Sathe
Section 143(3)

आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.02.2024 for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual who filed

Supriti Swananda Samudra, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 5(2), Pune

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

ITA 705/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 44ASection 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “एक सदस्य मामला” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI

Mr. Mahadev Sahebrao Bangar, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tac Offcer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S Bhandari &For Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

BENCH : This batch of six appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders, dated 03.01.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18, respectively. For the sake of convenience, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte orders of CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Mr. Mahadev Sahebrao Bangar, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tac Offcer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S Bhandari &For Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

BENCH : This batch of six appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders, dated 03.01.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18, respectively. For the sake of convenience, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte orders of CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Mr. Mahadev Sahebrao Bangar, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tac Offcer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 364/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S Bhandari &For Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

BENCH : This batch of six appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders, dated 03.01.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18, respectively. For the sake of convenience, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte orders of CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Mr. Mahadev Sahebrao Bangar, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tac Offcer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 363/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S Bhandari &For Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

BENCH : This batch of six appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders, dated 03.01.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18, respectively. For the sake of convenience, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte orders of CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Mr. Mahadev Sahebrao Bangar, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tac Offcer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 362/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S Bhandari &For Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

BENCH : This batch of six appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders, dated 03.01.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18, respectively. For the sake of convenience, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte orders of CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Mr. Mahadev Sahebrao Bangar, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tac Offcer, Ward-2, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 361/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S Bhandari &For Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

BENCH : This batch of six appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders, dated 03.01.2024 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18, respectively. For the sake of convenience, all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed ... Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte orders of CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Capiqal Consultancy Service Private Limited, Panvel Mumbai vs. DCIT, Panvel

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 178/PUN/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2018-2019

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

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 270A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Deepak Mahadev Mane, Murgud vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Kolhapur, Kolhapur

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

ITA 993/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld, CIT(A), NFAC, erred in passing ex-parte order confirming the addition made by the AO u/s 69A in respect of cash deposits of Rs.1

Neena Kailas Jadhav, Thane vs. ACIT Circle 1, Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 809/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “एक सदस्य मामला” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI

Priyadarshini Kanya Vidyalaya, Ghughus vs. ITO, TDS WD.-52, Chandrapur

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

ITA 50/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Mohammed A. LakkadshaFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

raised following grounds in its appeal:– “Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellant respectfully submits Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC ('the learned CIT-A') erred in sustaining Late fees levied u/s 234E for TDS Statement of the Appellant for assessment year

Skanda Kumar Kasturi, Kurnool vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kurnool

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 459/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.459/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Skanda Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Kasturi, Kurnool Ward 1 Pan:Actpk0562A Kurnool (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Smt. P. Sumitha, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/06/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 26/06/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. P. Sumitha, DR
Section 133ASection 68

की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 26/06/2024 आदेश/ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 02/03/2024 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, relating to A.Y.2017-18. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income

Vasu Kumar Vaddi, Machilipatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Machilipatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee (ITA No

ITA 21/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.20 & 21/Viz/2024 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vasu Kumar Vaddi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 16/372-16-1, Ward-1, Valandapalem, Industrial Estate Machilipatnam. Road, Machilipatnam – 521002, Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Aifpv 6289 F (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, Ar प्रत्याथीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनिाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04/06/2024 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of : 25/06/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144B(1)(xi)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)(b)Section 271Section 69A

appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)-NFAC”] vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058169213(1), dated 23/11/2023 for the AY 2013-14 arising out of the order 2 passed U/s. 147 r.w.s ... Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] and against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058169723(1), dated 23/11/2023 arising out of the order passed U/s. 271 of the Act for the AY 2013-14. Since both the appeals are filed by the same assessee

Vasu Kumar Vaddi, Machilipatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Machilipatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee (ITA No

ITA 20/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.20 & 21/Viz/2024 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vasu Kumar Vaddi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 16/372-16-1, Ward-1, Valandapalem, Industrial Estate Machilipatnam. Road, Machilipatnam – 521002, Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Aifpv 6289 F (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, Ar प्रत्याथीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनिाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04/06/2024 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of : 25/06/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144B(1)(xi)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 249(4)(b)Section 271Section 69A

appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)-NFAC”] vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058169213(1), dated 23/11/2023 for the AY 2013-14 arising out of the order 2 passed U/s. 147 r.w.s ... Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] and against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058169723(1), dated 23/11/2023 arising out of the order passed U/s. 271 of the Act for the AY 2013-14. Since both the appeals are filed by the same assessee

Darjeeling District Central Co.Op. Bank Ltd., Darjeeling vs. ACIT(OSD)(TDS)WD-5(3), Darjeeling

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 768/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri N. C. Mondal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 40

These three appeals having filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)” passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) dated ... assessee in ITA No. 766/Kol/2023 are reproduced as under: “1. THAT on facts of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Income Tax Department was wrong and not justified by confirming the order passed by the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD)(TDS), Ward

Darjeeling District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Darjeeling vs. ACIT, Cir-3(1), Siliguri.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 767/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri N. C. Mondal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 40

These three appeals having filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)” passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) dated ... assessee in ITA No. 766/Kol/2023 are reproduced as under: “1. THAT on facts of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Income Tax Department was wrong and not justified by confirming the order passed by the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD)(TDS), Ward

Darjeeling District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Darjeeling vs. ACIT(OSD)(TDS), WD-5(3), Darjeeling

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 766/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri N. C. Mondal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 40

These three appeals having filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)” passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) dated ... assessee in ITA No. 766/Kol/2023 are reproduced as under: “1. THAT on facts of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Income Tax Department was wrong and not justified by confirming the order passed by the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD)(TDS), Ward

Kulut Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Burdwan vs. ACIT, Cir-1, Burdwan.

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

ITA 1049/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Shuvo Chakraborty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 250

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)” passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... said cash deposits being supported by all documental evidence including complete books of account is illegal and bad in law. 3 For that ld. NFAC while confirming said cryptic addition did not considered four important points as such firstly, AO cannot added back the said cash deposits without rejecting