“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

M/S. Mangalore Yanthrika Meenugarara Prathamika Sahakari Sangha, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 1097/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Section 234Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Page 2 of 6 ITA Nos. 1096 to 1098/Bang/2023 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals arises out of separate orders passed by NFAC all dated 02.11.2023 for A.Ys. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2020-21. 2. At the outset, it is submitted that the issues raised ... have heard the contentions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed placed before us. 5. The Ld.AR submitted that the NFAC did not consider the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT reported

M/S. Mangalore Yanthrika Meenugarara Prathamika Sahakari Sangha, Mangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Mangalore

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

ITA 1096/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT (DR)

Section 234Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Page 2 of 6 ITA Nos. 1096 to 1098/Bang/2023 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals arises out of separate orders passed by NFAC all dated 02.11.2023 for A.Ys. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2020-21. 2. At the outset, it is submitted that the issues raised ... have heard the contentions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us. 5. The Ld.AR submitted that the NFAC did not consider the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Mavilayi Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT reported

Transnational Growth Fund Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-25(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 66/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year 2015-16 Transnational Growth Ito Fund Ltd., R-815, New Ward- 25 (3) Rajinder Nagar, North Vs. New Delhi East, New Delhi-110060 Pan No.Aaact0610Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR

pronouncement O R D E R PER N.K BILLAIYA, AM : This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 23.09.2023 by NFAC, Delhi pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16. 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the NFAC erred in confirming the assessment ... satisfied with the cause of delay. Hence, the delay is condoned. 4. Coming to the facts of the case there is no denial that NFAC has dismissed the appeal in limine though there is a reference of service of notice through e-mail but the appeal has been dismissed

Shusheel Kumar Agarwal., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-36, Kolkata.

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

ITA 1175/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Altaf Hossain, Addl. CIT

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 68

GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056048428(1) dated 13.09.2023 passed against the assessment order by ACIT, Circle-36, Kolkata u/s.144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... February, 2024 (Sonjoy Sarma) Accountant Member Dated: 29th February, 2024 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata //// By Order

Executive Engineer Construction Division No.2, Bhopal vs. DCIT (TDS), Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 348/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Executive Engineer, Dy. Cit (Tds), Construction, Bhopal Division No.2, बनाम/ E-5, Arera Colony, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Bplo 00510 G Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.02.2024

Section 12ASection 139Section 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 13.07.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of order dated 15.02.2021 passed by learned Dy. CIT-(TDS), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of Income

Mahadevaiah Mdabal Kempaiah, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1173/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2016-17 Mahadevaiah Madabal Kempaiah No.139, “Nemmadi” 2Nd Main Road Health Layout Ito Annapoorneshwarinagar Ward-3(3)(1) Vs. Bengaluru 560 091 Bengaluru Karnataka Pan No.Angpk1135M Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.R. Revenue By : Smt. Akta Jain B., D.R. Date Of Hearing : 29.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.02.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Nfac Dated 24.11.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. “The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Passing The Assessment Order In The Manner Passed. & The Impugned Order As Passed Being Bad In Law Is Required To Be Quashed. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Nfac, Delhi Has Erred In Passing The Impugned Order In The Manner Passed. The Impugned Order Having Been Passed Without Hearing The Appellant & In Total Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice Is Bad In Law & Void Ab-Initio & Is Liable To Be Quashed. Mahadevaiah Madabal Kempaiah, Bengaluru Page 2 Of 4 3. In Any Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Order As Passed By Income Tax Officer In Taxing A Sum Of Rs. 1,52,55,923/- As Income From Capital Gains By Holding That The Appellant Had Sold Not An Agricultural Land But An Industrially Converted Land. The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Have Not Been Appreciated By The Lower Authorities. On Proper Appreciation, It Would Be Clear That What Was Transferred By The Appellant Was An Agricultural Land Which Was Not A Capital Asset & Therefore, Gain On Such Land Not Assessable To Capital Gains.

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Akta Jain B., D.R

Section 234BSection 250Section 54B

Date of Pronouncement : 29.02.2024 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by assessee is directed against order of NFAC dated 24.11.2023 for the assessment year 2016-17 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”). The assessee has raised following ... passed. And the impugned order as passed being bad in law is required to be quashed. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-NFAC, DELHI has erred in passing the impugned order in the manner passed. The impugned order having been passed without hearing the appellant and in total

Sarvodaya Pharmacy, Dehradun vs. DCIT Circle-2(2)(1), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3110/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Shivam Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 26Section 3Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Ms

Anil Kumar HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 49(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2098/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2016-17 Anil Kumar, Huf, Vs Ito, Ward 49(1), B-17/4, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 015. Pan: Aafha2224P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.L. Deepak, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.02.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.06.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-17/10218/2018-19 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 20.12.2018, Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’) By The Ito, Ward-49(1), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao). 2. Heard & Perused The Record. The Assessee, As Huf, Has Filed Return Of Income Declaring An Income Of Rs.2,45,000/- & The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass For The Reason Of Cash Deposit During Demonetization Period & The Ld. Ao, On The Basis Of Notices Issued & Replies Filed, Had Made An Addition To The Extent Of 20% Out Of Total Credit Entries Of Rs.2,42,63,815/- In Bank Account No.912020020658201 In The Name Of M/S Ravi Devi Enterprises. The Ld.Cit(A) Has Also Sustained The Addition.

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Deepak, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 06.06.2023 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-17/10218/2018-19 arising out of the appeal

Beehive Systems Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 4(2), New Delhi

ITA 1059/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Sood, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: These are appeals preferred by the Assessee against the orders dated 13.02.2023 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeals No.CIT(A), Delhi-2/11023/15-16 and CIT(A), Delhi

Beehive Systems Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 4(3), New Delhi

ITA 1058/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Sood, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

Himachal Pradesh Technical University, Hamirpur vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh

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

ITA 115/CHANDI/2020[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Mar 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amitoz Singh Kamboj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 10

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Shri Nagjibhai Kuberbhai Kheni, Bhavnagar vs. Asst Unit, I Tax Dept. ( Income Tax Officer Ward 1(9) Bhavanagar ), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 862/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)

unexplained income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved against the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), NFAC. The assessee filed his Tax Consultant’s Notarized Affidavit explaining that inadvertently the Tax Consultant mentioned the agricultural income of the assessee as Rs.25,86,233/- but the above

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 573/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

These four appeals have been filed by the assessee against separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short], all dated 29.05.2023, passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 572/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 571/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 570/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

Rajesh Bhalchandra Gharat, New Panvel vs. CIT(A), Panvel

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 36/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraआयकर अपील सं. /Ita No.36/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055923148(1), dated 11.09.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Case called twice ... accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned NFAC has passed its cryptic and totally non 2 ITA.No.36/PUN/2024 Rajesh Bhalchandra Gharat speaking order; affirming the Assessing Officer’s impugned action, without dealing with merits

Barbate Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assistant Directore of Income Tax, CPC, Banglore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 50/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.50/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2018-19 Barbate Automotive India The Assistant Director Of Pvt. Ltd., V Income Tax, Cpc, Income K.H.No.63/6, Arya Cars, S Tax Department, Bhandara Road, Kapsi, Bengaluru – 560500. Nagpur – 441202. Pan: Aadcb1189M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Rachit Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)[Nfac]Dated 21.12.2022 For A.Y.2018-19 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Emanating From Order Under Section 154 Of The Act, Dated 28.02.2020 Passed By Asst. Commissioner Of Barbate Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., [A]

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 43B

DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)[NFAC]dated 21.12.2022 for A.Y.2018-19 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 emanating from order under section 154 of the Act, dated 28.02.2020 passed ... Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., [A] Income Tax(CPC). The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. That the National faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) /CIT (A) fails to consider the fact that the proceeding U/s 143(1) permit only prima-facie adjustment and debatable issue falls outside the ambit

Srinivasa Rao Inuganti, Mylavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 28/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.28/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Srinivasa Rao Inuganti Vs. Income Tax Officer Sy.No.537/5, S.V.S.Nager Ward-3(1) Mylavaram Vijayawada Ntr District [Pan : Abdpi5709C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 57Section 69A

Judicial Member : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/105879547(1) dated 15.12.2023, arising out of order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ... have considered the facts of the case and the Grounds of Appeal before dismissal ex parte. 2. The appellant’s appeal against before NFAC was filed by a Chartered Accountant (Mr.Gabbita Satya Narayana, CA, Vijayawada) and the communications in that respect had been made

Ganta Venkata Nanda Kishore, Tanuku vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tanuku

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

ITA 274/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.274/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Venkata Nanda Kishore Ganta Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.5-1, Near Satram Ward-1 Pydiparru Post Tanuku Tanuku, West Godavari [Pan : Anbpg4942R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69A