“NFAC”

Airoplast Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member)

supported by an affidavit, wherein it has been stated that the email address and contact number mentioned in Form No 35 filed before the NFAC belong to the deponent, that the impugned order dated 11 November 2024 was not received on the said registered email address nor through

Kshitij Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarkshitij Interiors Pvt. Ltd. Dcit- Circle 210, Mogra Village, Old 2(1)(1), Nagardas Road, Mumbai- Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 400069 Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aabck8174D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vishwas Mehendale Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 17.09.2025 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 ... unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the penalty of Rs. 1,03,15,656/- levied by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the learned CIT(A), NFAC, is hereby deleted. 23. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 21.01.2026. (ANIKESH BANERJEE

Everard Towers Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Everard Tower Chs Ltd vs. Ward 41(1)(2), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhavan

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) The Everard Tower Co-Operative Housing Ito,Ward-41(1)(2), Mumbai Society Limited Vs Kautilyabhavan, Bandrakurla B-1007, Everard Tower Chs Ltd. Complex, Bandra (East), Eastern Express Highway, Sion (East), Mumbai – 400051. Mumbai – 400022. [Pan No. Aaaae2800M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

assessment order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 20.08.2025for A.Y. 2016-17.The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. Ld. CIT(A) / (NFAC) erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO of disallowing the deduction though same was allowed on identical facts or AY 2017-18 vide order ... NFAC) erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO of disallowing deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of Rs. 35,71,053.” 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that a very short dispute

Jigar Bharat Sheth (Legal Heir of Late Shri Bharat Kumar Manilal Sheth ), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 27(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethjigar Bharat Sheth (Legal Heir Of Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 27(1)(2), Late Shri Bharatkumar Manilal Mumbai. Tower No. 6, 4Th Floor, 407, Vashi, Sheth). 43, Savani Apartment, 8Th Floor, Navi Mumbai-400703. M.G. Road, Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai-400077. Pan/Gir No:Aedps3883E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Nilesh Kariya Respondent By Shri Kavitha Kaushik (Sr Dr)

grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are as under: “1.The Learned Assessing Officer (Ld. AO) and Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in proceeding to pass the order u/s 143(3) ITA No.7317/MUM/2025/AY 2015-16 Jigar Bharat Sheth and u/s 250 of the Income ... Legal heir of the Appellant in Violation of the provisions of section 159 of the Act, hence the proceeding is void ab initio. 3.The NFAC further erred in holding that the Appellant was alive at the time of making investment and filing ITR since the ITR was filed

Connect Pack LLP, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2017-18 Connect Pack Llp, Income Tax Office Office No.4 Second Floor, Naitonal Faceless Washington Plaza, 269 Vs. Assessment Centre, Topiwala Road, Goregawan, Delhi – 110001. Mumbai – 400062. Pan – Aakfc2777Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Shailendra Singh Solanki, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 05.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 27.09.2025, 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 10.05.2023 Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act, Has Made An Addition Of Rs.36,50,000/- As Unexplained Cash Deposit Under Section 68 Of The Act. 2 Connect Pack Llp

Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 27.09.2025, 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

DCIT Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Nissim Traders Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Dcit, Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai Nissim Traders Private Limited 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Vs E-203, Guruprasad Plot No. 5, S.S. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400020. Nagar, Cross Road No. 2, Andheri East, Azad Nagar, Mumbai – 400053. [Pan: Aabcn3760G] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Physical hearing) DCIT, Circle 2

Mr. Dhiren Pradip Sadiwala, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(1)(6), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

order dated 29-04- 2024. 2. Mayur Kanjibhai Shah vs. ITO, ITA No. 3243/MUM/2023, Order dated 31- 01-2024. 3. Parag Motilal Savla vs. NFAC, Delhi, ITA No. 4221/MUM/2023, Order dated 06-01-2025. 4. RajeshkumarRameshchandra Shah vs. DCIT, ITA No. 5568 to 5573/MUM/2024, Order dated

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in c NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the onfirming the reopening of the assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances ... case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs 20,00,000/- being share application money received from Sumukh

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

assessee are reproduced as under: “1. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had wrongly reopened the assessment ... Section 147 to 151 of the Act. 3. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs 20,00,000/- being share application money received from Sumukh Commercial Pvt Ltd though no such amount

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

assessee are reproduced as under: “1. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had wrongly reopened the assessment ... Section 147 to 151 of the Act. 3. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs 20,00,000/- being share application money received from Sumukh Commercial Pvt Ltd though no such amount

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

assessee are reproduced as under: “1. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had wrongly reopened the assessment ... Section 147 to 151 of the Act. 3. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs 20,00,000/- being share application money received from Sumukh Commercial Pvt Ltd though no such amount

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

circumstances of the case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in c NFAC erred in confirming the reopening of the onfirming the reopening of the assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances ... case and in law, the a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs 20,00,000/- being share application money received from Sumukh

Gangaram Sukhdeo Chavan, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 29(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of the order of Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 25.06.2025 u/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act,1961. The assessee has filed this appeal with following grounds of appeal:- "1) On the facts

M/S. Nucleus Fincons Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 15(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Nucleus Fincons Pvt. Ito 15(2) (2), Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Since Strike Off By Roc From Mumbai – 400020. 24/02/2017 Through Erstwhile Director, Kishore Patki), Vs. 503, Ankita Apartments, Opp. Gymkhana, Navghar Road, Mulund, Mumbai – 400081. Pan – Aabc6734A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.09.2023, 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. 2012-13. 2. In The Instant Case, The Ao Vide Assessment Order Dated 27.11.2019 Under Section 147 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Has Made The Additions Of Rs.7,00,000,/- & Rs.19,88,290/- Respectively As Unexplained Income Under Section 68 Of The Act & Estimation Of Income @ 1 + 1 % Of Rs.9,94,14,500/- On Credit & Debit Side. 2 M/S. Nucleus Fincons Pvt. Ltd

Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 22.09.2023, 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

9X Media Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

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

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain9X Media Private Limited Vs. Acit 16(1), Mumbai Ground Floor, Gala No. 1, Room No. 439, Aayakar Abel Estate, Saki Vihar Bhavan, Mk Road, Road, Saki Naka, Mumbai- Mumbai- 400020 400072 Pan/Gir No. Aabc15594D (Applicant) (Respondent)

assessee challenging the impugned order 29.05.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2022-23. 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified

Kelvin Air Conditioning and Ventilation Systems Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 10(1)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

pronouncement : 21/01/2026 O R D E R Per Anikesh Banerjee (JM): The instant appeal 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) for the Assessment Year

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Sahyadri Agencies Limited, Moothedath House Arikanniyur

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

I.T.A. No. 4257/Mum/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI GIRISH