“NFAC”

Sachin Kishor Sheth, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 42(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. These two appeals by assessee are directed against the separate orders of ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi both dated 17.10.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23 & 2023-24 respectively. Certain facts in both the appeals are common; the assessee has raised

Suguna Radhakrishna Adappa (L/H Radhakrishna Monappa Adappa), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 27(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishsuguna Radhakrishna Adappa, Income Tax Officer, (Legal Heir Of Late Radhakrishna Monappa Ward 27(3)(1), Adappa) Kalyan Santosh Lunch Home, Shop No.1, Vs. Vihar Darshan, 7Th Road, Rajawadi, Vidyavihar (East), Mumbai 400070 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpa 6632K Appellant By : Shri Devendra Jain Respondent By : Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. Dr (Appellant) (Respondent) Date Of Hearing : 14.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026

Saktijit Dey, Vice President: This is an appeal by the assessee against an order dated 12.09.2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi confirming the penalty imposed of Rs.1,04,171/- under section (u/s.) 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) for the Assessment

Prakash Jewellers, Mumbai vs. ACIT 32(2), Mumbai Bandra

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year: 2017-18 Prakash Jewellers, Acit 32 (2) 31 B-1 2Nd Floor, Meghdoot, S V Room No. 720, 7Th Floor, Road, Borivli West, Mumbai, Kautilya Bhavan C-41 To C- Vs. Maharashtra – 400092 43 G Block Bandra East, Mumbai, Maharashtra Pan : Aaafp4374Q 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.10.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. In The Instant Case, The Assessing Officer Vide Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2019 Has Made An Addition Of Rs. 5,90,00,000/- Being Cash Deposited, In Yes Bank By The 2 Prakash Jewellers Assessee During The Demonetization Period, As Unexplained Cash Credit Under Section 68 Of The Act.

Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 08.10.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short

Apurva Mukesh Thakkar, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(2)(1) Mumbai, Kautiliya Bhavan

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarapurva Mukesh Ito Ward 41 Thakkar (2)(1) Mumbai 11 Dr Rp Road & Ns Vs. Room No. 234 Mataji Bungalow Bldg Kautilya Bhavan Cross Road Near City C41 To C43 Block Bank Atm Mumbai Bkc Bandra East 400080 - Mumbai Mumbai 400051, Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Adspt8293K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shriparth J. Bhatt Revenue By Shrisurendra Mohan (Sr. Dr.) Date Of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22.01.2026

appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.10.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”], under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961[hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], for the assessment ... chronological manner, the reasons for the delayed filing. In substance, the assessee has averred that: i. The order passed by the CIT(A), NFAC under section 250 dated 29.10.2021 was never served upon the assessee, either electronically or through physical mode. ii. The assessee was under a bona fide belief

Naresh Purohit, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 21 2(1), Mumbai

The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Arun Khodpia: A.Y. : 2017-18 Naresh Purohit Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 21 (2)(1), 184, Ground Floor Mumbai Sara Shopping Centre 16-A, Sabu Siddik Road Mumbai- 400 001 Pan:Agrpp6408A

JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT : By this appeal, appellant assessee is challenging the order dated 06.05.2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ for short) thereby confirming the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’ for short) under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B

Deupty Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Anand Rathi Commodities Limited, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT

Ganpat Harishchandra Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishι.Τ.Α. No. 5827/Mum/2025

ITA Nos.5827, 5828, 5829 & 5830/M/2025 Ganpat H Purohit IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT

Ganpat Harishchandra Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishι.Τ.Α. No. 5827/Mum/2025

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Ganpat Harishchandra Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC -4(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishι.Τ.Α. No. 5827/Mum/2025

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITO- 27(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Savla Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishincome Tax Officer-27(3)(1), Savla Associates, Mumbai - 400706 24A, Shree Laxmi Niwas , Vs. M.G. Road, Ghatkopar West, Mumbai- 400706 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aagfs 8614J Appellant By : Shri Nilesh Joshi Respondent By : Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. Dr (Appellant) (Respondent) Date Of Hearing : 14.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026

Saktijit Dey, Vice President: This is an appeal by the Revenue against an order dated 18.07.2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Though, the Department has raised multiple grounds however, the solitary issue in dispute is deletion of addition of Rs.5

Mrs. Jigna Hiren Rambhia, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 27(1)(5), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

challenging the impugned order dt. 20.06.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee has raised the following rolls of appeal. (i)On facts and circumstances of the case

Arvind Bhaguji Kangane, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-27(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 and 3 of appeal are

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Ms. Padmavathy S(Physical Hearing) Arvind Bhanguji Kangane Dcit, Circle – 27(1), Mumbai Shreyas Building, 11Th Road, Plot No. 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Vs 553, Flat No. 901, 9Th Floor, Opp. Railway Station Building, Navi Heritage Pride Building, Chembur, Mumbai – 400703. Mumbai – 400026. [Pan: Afypk1856R] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dated 11.06.2025 for A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1.0On facts and circumstances of the case ... facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the re-assessment order passed u/s.147 dated 23/03/2022 by National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is bad-in-law, since the scheme for faceless assessment of income escaping assessment prescribed u/s.151A had been notified by the CBDT w.e.f. 29/03/2022; 2 Arvind Bhaguji

Multi Venture Infotech Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year: 2014-15 Multi Venture Infotech Pvt. National Faceless Appeal Ltd., Centre 404 Bldg No. 8A Damodar Park, National Faceless Appeal Vs. Ghatkopar West, Mumbai, Centre, 245-A, North Block, Maharashtra – 400086 New Delhi, Delhi - 110001 Pan : Aaacm9718L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Tejas Sodha, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr.D.R. Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.04.2023, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) /Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2014-15. 2. In The Instant Case, The Assessing Officer Vide Assessment Order Dated 24.05.2023 Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 (B) Of The Act Has Made The Additions / Disallowances Of Rs. 2,03,00,000/- & Rs. 96,11,642/- Respectively On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit Under Section 68 Of The Act & 2 Multi Venture Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Disallowance Of Loss In Derivative Transaction (Variation Proposed).

Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 12.04.2023, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) /Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short

Income Tax Officer Ward 22.1.1, Mumbai vs. Antara Tushar Motiwala, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT

Nirman Realtors and Developers Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

assessment year 2012-13, raising following grounds: 1. On facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT-A NFAC, ought to have held that the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) are invalid and bad in law as the assessing officer who passed the assessment order ... Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT-A - NFAC, ought to have deleted the addition of Rs. 1,84,86,824/-. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income for the year

Advanced Computers and Mobiles India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Ms. Padmavathy S(Physical Hearing) Advanced Computers & Mobiles Dcit, Circle – 1(1)(1), Mumbai Room No. 533, 5Th Floor, India Private Limited Vs Unit No. 9, Ground Floor, Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Yusuf Building, Flora Fountain, Fort, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400001. [Pan: Aamca5425A] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dated 10.03.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld.A.O

Yashwantrao Chavan Centre (Previously Know As Yashwantrao Chavan Pratishthan), Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption)-2(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Yashwantrao Chavan Centre, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption)-2(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Yashwantrao Chavan Centre, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption(-2(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Ketan Babulal Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokari.T.A No.1932/Mum/2025 A.Y. : 2014-15) I.T.A. No.1933/Mum/2025 A.Y. : 2015-16)

Anikesh Banerjee (JM): The instant appeals of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee filed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [for brevity, ‘Ld.CIT(A)’] order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the Act) order was passed on 25.01.2025 for Assessment Year