NFAC — 48,618 case laws

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 193/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC] in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052849528(1), dated 15/5/2023 arising out of the order passed U/s. 143(3) of the Income ... Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 191/VIZ/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC] in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052849528(1), dated 15/5/2023 arising out of the order passed U/s. 143(3) of the Income ... Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. M/S. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 125/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC] in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052849528(1), dated 15/5/2023 arising out of the order passed U/s. 143(3) of the Income ... Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 106/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC] in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052849528(1), dated 15/5/2023 arising out of the order passed U/s. 143(3) of the Income ... Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

Mahendra Ramlabhaya Varma, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 895/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 895/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18)

For Appellant: Vora, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr. DR

MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 07.12.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward 5(2)(5), Ahmedabad under Section ITA No. 895/Ahd/2023 (Mahendra Ramlabhaya Varma

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Fairdeal Suppliers Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 420/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Ahmedabad22 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 420/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19)

For Respondent: Shri P. F. Jain, A.R

Section 143(3)

instant appeal filed at the instance of the Revenue is directed against the order dated 29.03.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 31.05.2021 passed by the NFAC, Delhi under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

Tulsibhai Kashiram Patel, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Patan

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

ITA 1033/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1033/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13)

For Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 205(6)

MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.08.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 26.12.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward 5, Patan (in short ‘AO’) under Section 143(3) r.w.s

Kotluk Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Seva Society Ltd, Ratnagiri vs. Income Tax Officer Ratnagiri Ward, Ratnagiri

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 265/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta

Section 144Section 250(6)Section 80P

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1060035979(1), dated 23.01.2024, involving proceedings u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both ... were passed. 5. We have heard rival submissions of both the parties and perused the record. It emerges at the outset that the NFAC has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting the assessee’s contentions 3 ITA.No.265/PUN./2024 vide ex-parte

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

ITA 1447/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta

Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80C

Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : These assessee’s three appeals, arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s as many Din and Order Nos.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1044988054(1); 1044988235(1) and 1044988211(1); all dated 27.08.2022, involving proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) [for A.Y.2016-2017]; and sec.270A ... bogus claim under sec.80C deduction(s) is an instance of “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” in para-iii pages 7 to 8 in the NFAC’s order. Whereas it’s impugned discussion in para.7.9 onwards holds it as a fit case for confirming the impugned penalty after having found

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

ITA 1402/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta

Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80C

Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : These assessee’s three appeals, arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s as many Din and Order Nos.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1044988054(1); 1044988235(1) and 1044988211(1); all dated 27.08.2022, involving proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) [for A.Y.2016-2017]; and sec.270A ... bogus claim under sec.80C deduction(s) is an instance of “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” in para-iii pages 7 to 8 in the NFAC’s order. Whereas it’s impugned discussion in para.7.9 onwards holds it as a fit case for confirming the impugned penalty after having found

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

ITA 1401/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta

Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80C

Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : These assessee’s three appeals, arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s as many Din and Order Nos.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1044988054(1); 1044988235(1) and 1044988211(1); all dated 27.08.2022, involving proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) [for A.Y.2016-2017]; and sec.270A ... bogus claim under sec.80C deduction(s) is an instance of “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” in para-iii pages 7 to 8 in the NFAC’s order. Whereas it’s impugned discussion in para.7.9 onwards holds it as a fit case for confirming the impugned penalty after having found

Bank of India, Butibori, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

assessee instituted u/s 253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation ... deducted from the interest etc., paid/credited to various parties/customers etc. 3.3 Aggrieved by the penalty orders, the assessee instituted separate appeals before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

assessee instituted u/s 253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation ... deducted from the interest etc., paid/credited to various parties/customers etc. 3.3 Aggrieved by the penalty orders, the assessee instituted separate appeals before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals

Bank of India, Dongargaon, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

assessee instituted u/s 253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation ... deducted from the interest etc., paid/credited to various parties/customers etc. 3.3 Aggrieved by the penalty orders, the assessee instituted separate appeals before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

assessee instituted u/s 253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation ... deducted from the interest etc., paid/credited to various parties/customers etc. 3.3 Aggrieved by the penalty orders, the assessee instituted separate appeals before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals

Bank of India, Dharampeth, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

assessee instituted u/s 253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation ... deducted from the interest etc., paid/credited to various parties/customers etc. 3.3 Aggrieved by the penalty orders, the assessee instituted separate appeals before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals

Anirudha Harihar Mandal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Nagpur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 390/Nag/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Anirudha Harihar Mandal 335, New Nandanwan, Nagpur-440009 Pan: Agopm9294J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Smt Veena Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 144Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1057602841(1) dt. 01/11/2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] by the National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] for assessment year 2020-21 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that; 2.1 the assessee is an individual engaged ... carried the matter in appeal before first appellate authority u/s 246A(1)(a) of the Act. While dealing with assessee’s appeal the Ld. NFAC provided as much as six opportunities commencing from July 2023 to October, 2023. However, the assessee was indifferent, he did neither comply with any notice

Bank of India, Itwari, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, (TDS) Range-1, Nagpur

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

assessee instituted u/s 253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation ... deducted from the interest etc., paid/credited to various parties/customers etc. 3.3 Aggrieved by the penalty orders, the assessee instituted separate appeals before Ld. NFAC u/s 246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals

Fahimuddin Inamdar, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2), Nagpur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 241/Nag/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Fahimuddin Inamdar 340, Opp. Qidwai Ground, Lashkaribaug, Nagpur-440017 Pan: Aaypi7048E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2), Nagpur. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mr R V Loya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By This Appeal The Assessee Impugns The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1053135085(1) Dt. 24/05/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2015-16 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr R V Loya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(3)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 68

order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1053135085(1) dt. 24/05/2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] by the National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] for assessment year 2015-16 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. 2. Tersely stated facts of the case are that; 2.1 the assessee is an individual engaged ... carried the matter in appeal before first appellate authority u/s 246A(1)(a) of the Act. While dealing with assessee’s appeal the Ld. NFAC provided as much as four opportunities vide notice dt. 31/12/2020, 21/04/2021, 17/08/2021 and finally notice dt. 18/05/2023. However, the assessee did neither comply with

Central Bank Staff Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nagpur

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 423/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y Marathe, Sr.DR

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

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-2018, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1046530533(1), dated 31.10.2022, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short

“NFAC”

Leading authorities on NFAC

Judgments citing NFAC

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam vs. M/S. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam

Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

Mahendra Ramlabhaya Varma, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(2)(5), Ahmedabad

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Fairdeal Suppliers Limited, Ahmedabad

Tulsibhai Kashiram Patel, Mehsana vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Patan

Kotluk Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Seva Society Ltd, Ratnagiri vs. Income Tax Officer Ratnagiri Ward, Ratnagiri

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

Sunil Chunilal Kumavat, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

Bank of India, Butibori, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Bank of India, Dongargaon, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Bank of India, Dharampeth, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Range-1, Nagpur

Anirudha Harihar Mandal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Nagpur

Bank of India, Itwari, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, (TDS) Range-1, Nagpur

Fahimuddin Inamdar, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2), Nagpur

Central Bank Staff Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nagpur