“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

Soil & Water Consevation Department, Latur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(TDS), Range-Nashik, Nashik

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

ITA 41/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.41/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 200(3)Section 272(2)(k)Section 272A(2)(k)

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 07.11.2023 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a Department of Government ... levy of penalty of Rs.1,08,100/- u/s.272A(2)(k) r.w.s.200(3) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer levying the penalty. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal

Shree Gudaleshwar Gramin Bigar Sheti Sah Pat Sanshta Maryadit, Gudal, Radhanagari, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Kolhapur

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 406/PUN/2024[A.Y. 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri A.S. NaikFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

BENCH : This assessee’s appeal, for assessment year 2020- 2021, arises against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060100571(1), dated 28.09.2022, in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both ... parties. Case file perused. 2 I.T.A.No. 406/PUN./2024 2. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance in the instant appeal challenges correctness of learned NFAC’s action disallowing it’s sec.80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) deduction claim of Rs.1,55,87,420/- representing interest income(s) realized from parking

Kanifnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2, Ahmednagar

ITA 392/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.392/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Kanifnath Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit At Post: Maldad, Tal.:Sangamner, Dist.: Ahmednagar-422608 Pan: Abbak1395E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Ahmednagar . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)Section 80P(2)

When aforestated denial of 80P(2) deduction is assailed in an appeal before first appellate authority, the Ld. NFAC accorded as many as three clear opportunities of hearing vide notices dt. 06/10/2023, 03/01/2024 & 11/01/2024 which however remained un-responded. In absence of any representation or written submission from the assessee ... NFAC dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution by relying on the catena of decision of including ‘CIT Vs B.N. Bhattacharya’ [1997, 118 ITR 461 (SC)]. 2.3 Aggrieved assessee society brought up this appeal challenging the action of Ld. NFAC on violation of principle of natural justice and denial

Gera Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

ITA 391/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.0391/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Gera Holdings Pvt. Ltd., 200, Gera Plaza, Boat Club Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aaacg6704C . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Nilesh Khandelwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 199Section 250

June, 2024. आदेश की प्रनिनलनप अग्रेनर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2.प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The NFAC, Delhi (India) 4. The CIT, Central, Pune 5. DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गार्डफ़ाइल / Guard File. आिेशानुसार / By Order वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर

The Jalgaon Peoples Co-Operative Bank Limited, Jalgaon vs. DCIT Circle-1 Jalgaon, Jalgaon

ITA 185/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.185/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Jalgaon People Co-Op. Bank Ltd. 152, Polan Peth, Dana Bazar, Jalgaon-425001. Pan: Aacat1603M . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)(a)

against returned income. 2.2 When aforestated additions are assailed in an appeal before first appellate authority, the Ld. NFAC accorded as many as four clear opportunities of hearing vide notices dt. 18/01/2021, 11/12/2023, 22/12/2023 & 01/01/2024 which however remained un-responded. In absence of any representation or written submission from ... assessee, the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution by relying on the catena of decision of including ‘CIT Vs B.N. Bhattacharya’ [1997, 118 ITR 461 (SC)]. 2.3 Aggrieved assessee society brought up this appeal challenging the action of Ld. NFAC on violation of principle of natural

Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Ahmednagar vs. Goreshwar Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Parner Dist. Ahmednagar

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1191/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

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

BENCH : This Revenue’s appeal, for assessment year 2020- 2021, arises against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056593957(1), dated 27.09.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Case ... I.T.A.No. 1191/PUN./2023 proceedings before the Hon'ble Tribunal which may please be granted.” 3. Learned DR next invited our attention to the NFAC’s detailed discussion accepting the assessee’s 80P deduction claim as under : 4 I.T.A.No. 1191/PUN./2023 5 I.T.A.No. 1191/PUN./2023 6 I.T.A.No. 1191/PUN./2023 7 I.T.A.No

Metta Supriya, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 455/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Section 69A

Account. Therefore, once the assessee has explained the source for cash deposits, in our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT (A) NFAC ought to have accepted the explanation of the assessee, unless the Assessing Officer makes out a case that the cash withdrawal from ICICI Bank Account ... furnished by the assessee without bringing on record any contrary evidence on record to disprove the claim of the assessee. The learned CIT (A) NFAC without appreciating the relevant facts simply sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Thus, I set aside the order passed by the learned

Raparthy Venugopal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 11(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 419/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 419/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Raparthy Venugopal Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 11(4) Pan: Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Helan Ruby Jesindha,Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Helan Ruby Jesindha,DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23/02/2024 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 ... Page 2 of 5 ITA No 419 of 2024 Raparthy Venugopal 3. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A) NFAC who dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to submit any submission or evidence during the appellate proceedings in support of grounds

Shri Alok Kumar Maiti, Haldia vs. ITO, Ward-27(2), Haldia

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

ITA 59/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT, D/R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69Section 69ASection 80T

following grounds of appeal:- “1. That on the facts and on the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the CIT(A), (NFAC), Delhi, dated 21.9.2023, is bad in law, illegal and abinitio void and the same is liable to be cancelled / set aside / quashed. 2. That

Shivananda Patil, Kolkata vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangaluru

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

ITA 32/KOL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 30 To 32/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 To 2022-23 Shivananda Patil Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Vs Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Beipp9978P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate But Identical Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21 To 2022-23. 2. As The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. The Common Issue Involved In These Appeals That Arises For Our Adjudication Is In Respect Of Denial Of Relief Claimed U/S 90 Of The Act On Account Of Delay In Furnishing Of Form 67 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 250Section 90

case of delay in filing Form No. 67. Same view is also taken by a coordinate division bench in Vinodkumar Lakshmipathi V CIT(A) NFAC ITA No.680/Bang/2022 06.09.2022. It is well settled that while laying down a particular procedure, if no negative or adverse consequences are contemplated for non-adherence

Shivananda Pati, Jalpaiguri vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 31/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 250Section 90

Shivananda Patil, Jalpaiguri vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 30/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Probhash Roy, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 250Section 90

Emerald Company Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 8(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 252/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250

order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act') dated 13.12.2023 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. 'CIT(A)'], pertaining to AY 2015-16. 2. In this case the assessee is seen to have filed his return of income ... Graphite India Office Premises, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700016. 2. DCIT, Cir.-8(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. //// By order

Manush Commodities (P) Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO, Ward-15(3), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 612/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 24.04.2023 for the AY 2014-15. 2. At the outset the Ld. Counsel ... Manush Commodities pvt. Ltd. 61, Dhananjay Bhatt Acharjee Sarani, Ghospara, Bally, Howrah-711227 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-15(3), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)By Order

Ajay Kumar Singhania (HUF), Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 43(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 54/KOL/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 14A

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 5 December, 2022 passed for assessment year 2012-13. ITA No. 54/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Ajay Kumar Singhania (HUF) 2. This appeal was listed ... Income Tax Officer, Ward-43(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 (3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi; (4) CIT- , Kolkata (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr

Malvika Periwal, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-29(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 670/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 68

ORDER Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM Appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27.09.2022 for AY 2014-15. 2. The only issue raised by the assessee in various grounds of appeal is against the confirmation of addition ... Sonjoy Sarma) Accountant Member Dated: 3rd June, 2024 JD, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant– 2. Respondent . 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. CIT, 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata,By Order

M/S Pooyappally Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kollam vs. The ITO Ward 2(1), Kollam

ITA 66/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt J M Jamuna Devi

Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Years (‘A.Y.’ for short

M/S Pooyappally Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Kollam vs. The ITO Ward 2(1), Kollam

ITA 65/COCH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt J M Jamuna Devi

Section 250Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

Mydeen Batcha Shek Alaudheen, Thanjavur vs. ITO, Ward-2, Pudukottai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 780/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.780/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mr. Mydeen Batcha Sheik Alaudheen Ito 1452, Abdulla Agencies Ward-2, बनाम/ Thanjavur Main Road, Pudukottai. Vs. Gandharvakottai-613 301. Thanjavur Dist. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Elcps-9589-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri K.Meenakshisundaram (Itp)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22-05-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.Meenakshisundaram (ITP)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) -Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

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)] on 09-01-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer

Thiruvarur Medical Centre (P) Ltd., Thirivarur vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Trichy

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 779/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.779/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Thiruvarur Medical Centre (P) Ltd. Acit बनाम/ No.3, Javulikara Street, Circle –2(1), Vs. Thiruvarur-610 001. Trichy. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabct-9325-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri K. Meenakshisundaram (Itp)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22-05-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Ex-Parte Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] On 27-12-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] On Best Judgment Basis U/S 144 Of The Act On 24- 12-2019. The Assessee Has Failed To Appear Before Any Of Lower Authorities. The Registry Has Noted A Delay Of 29 Days In The Appeal, Which Stand Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri K. Meenakshisundaram (ITP)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) -Ld. DR

Section 144

Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an ex-parte order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 27-12-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis