← All Phrases

“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
43
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
34
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
34
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
32
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
21
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
14
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
13
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
11
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

Reliable Vinimay (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 695/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 695/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Reliable Vinimay Private Limited,………..….Appellant Kaveri House, 132/1, Mahatma Gandhi Road, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aadcr7841N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, A.R. & Shri Rajeev Kumar Choudhury, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 13, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: March 12, 2024 O R D E R

Section 147Section 148Section 68

assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 1 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Reliable Vinimay Private Limited National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 21st June, 2023. 2. The assessee in this appeal has agitated against the confirmation of addition of Rs.3,03,00,000/- made ... Officer, Ward-7(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 (3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi; (4) CIT- , Kolkata 11 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Reliable Vinimay Private Limited (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard FileBy order

Pasumpon Thevar Educational Charitable Trust, Thoothukudi, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1543/CHNY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1543/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Pasumpon Thevar Educational Ito Charitable Trust Exemption Ward, बनाम/ Vs. 22, Sethu Palace, Kovilpatti Tirunelveli Thoothukudi Dist -628 502. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aactp-7987-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Ca) For Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)- Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-03-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj (CA) for Shri S. SridharFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 26-09-2023 in the matter of an intimation issued by CPC, Bengaluru u/s.143