“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

ACIT, Circle CC 15, New Delhi vs. Alka Mendiratta, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1864/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 153ASection 69

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

ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi vs. Yash Pal Mendiratta, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1863/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 153ASection 69

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

Nitin H Mundra (HUF), Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 1(3)(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 966/AHD/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR

Section 147

instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.10.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the NFAC, Delhi, ITA No. 966/Ahd/2023 (Nitin H Mundra

Anand Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Aurangabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Aurangabad

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 137/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: CA Santosh B GarudFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath

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

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1058243687(1), dated 27.11.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard

Rotary Pratishthan, Khed vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Ratnagiri, Ratnagiri

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

ITA 896/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryrotary Pratishthan, Vs Ito, Ward-4, Ratnagiri. C/O Bipin Ramchandra Patne, Deep Enterprises, Vani Peth, Khed, Dist. Ratnagiri-415709 Pan: Aabtr 1955 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 06/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/03/2024 Order Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 28.07.2023 For A.Y.2012-13 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl. CIT

pronouncement : 07/03/2024 ORDER Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, dated 28.07.2023 for A.Y.2012-13 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. In this case, the NFAC has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ... limine on the ground of limitation without going into the merits. We observe from the order of NFAC, as evident at para 4 of its order, that the appeal by the assessee was filed with a delay of 07 years and 05 months. The assessee had submitted the reasons

Jagannath Tryambakrao Vyavahare, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Nashik

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

ITA 1436/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1436/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Jaganath Tryambakrao The Income Tax Vyavahare, V Officer, Ward-2(1), Sambhaji Chowk, Niphad, S Nashik. Nashik, Maharashtra – 422303. Pan: Aigpv5925R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Smt. Deepa Khare – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr Date Of Hearing 06/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Dated 09.08.2023 For A.Y.2015-16. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : “1. The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal & Upholding The Order Of Ld Ao Without Serving Notice Of Hearing On The Registered Address Of The Appellant.

Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 282

ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] dated 09.08.2023 for A.Y.2015-16. The Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under : “1. The Ld CIT(A) erred ... merit. Submission of ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) : 3. The ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer(AO) and ld.CIT(A)[NFAC]. Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is observed from the order of the ld.CIT(A)[NFAC] that

Balaji Madhavrao Malwade, Panvel vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi.

ITA 1190/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath

Section 147

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1055372984(1), dated 24.08.2023, involving proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard

Maharashtra Rajya Vidyut Mandal Nagari Credit Co Op Society Ltd, Sangli vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1184/PUN/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(d)

1184/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2020-2021 Maharashtra Rajya Vidyut Mandalnagari Credit Co.op Society Ltd., S.No.378/2, National Faceless Appeal Centre vs. Plot No.10, Vishrambag, [“NFAC”] Sangli – 416 436. Delhi Maharashtra. PAN AAAAM0517B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Basavaraj Hiremath Date of Hearing : 07.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement ... SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1056170761(1), dated 17.09.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Cases

Sds Metals (I) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 99/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Sds Metals (I) Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Limited, Hyderabad. Ward –3(1), C/O. P. Murali & Co., Hyderabad. Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, Somajiguda, Telangana – 500082. Pan : Aascs1826P. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Krishna, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Yadagiri, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 07.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2024 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2017-18 Arises From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dt.18.09.2023 Invoking Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Krishna, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri, Sr.AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2017-18 arises from the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dt.18.09.2023 invoking proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”). 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is barred

Narasimha Sunanda Reddy Vongumalle, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle - 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 25/HYD/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Mar 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2003-04 Narasimha Sunanda Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Reddy Vongumalle, Of Income Tax, R/O.8-2-236, Plot No.406, Circle – 1(1), (Old) Silpa Manor, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500038. Pan : Abmpv9517E. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, C.A Revenue By: Shri B. Yadagiri, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 06.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri, SR.AR

Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2003-04 arises from the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dt.08.11.2023 invoking proceedings under section 143 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”). 3. The grounds raised by the assessee read ... section 143 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 5. Feeling aggrieved with the order of Assessing Officer assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, who granted part relief to the assessee by observing as under : “5.2.1 During the course of present appellate proceedings, the appellant has stated that

Khaja Mannan Ullaha, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Siddipet

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 127/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Khaja Mannan Ullaha, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward –1, H.No.17-1-B/18/1, Siddipet, Santosh Nagar Colony, Telangana – 502103. Near Sadhana College, Saidabad, Telangana – 500059. Pan : Axdpk2597E. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri A. V. Raghuram, C.A. Revenue By: Sri B. Yadagiri, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 07.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2024

For Appellant: Sri A. V. Raghuram, C.AFor Respondent: Sri B. Yadagiri, SR.AR

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2017-18 arises from the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dt.11.12.2023 invoking proceedings under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”). 2. The grounds raised by the assessee reads as under ... Feeling aggrieved with the order of Assessing Officer, assessee filed an appeal, which was later migrated to the ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, who granted part relief to the assessee. 5. Before me, Ld.A.R. has submitted that the cash deposits made by the assessee were belonged to his elderly parents

Fastner Commodeal Private Limited, Siliguri vs. ADIT (CPC), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1010/KOL/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

assessee for the assessment year 2020-21 is directed against the order dated 31.07.2023 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeals, NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the ‘ld. CIT(A)’]. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income

Bright Singh Chelladurai, Nagercoil vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Tirunelveli

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1424/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1424/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Bright Singh Chelladurai Ito बनाम No.5 Nanthanial Street, Ward-1, / Vs. Nagercoil-629 001. Tirunelveli. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Atvpb-0028-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman (Advocate)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 07-03-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-03-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 23-10-2023 In The Matter Of Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Act On 22-03-2022. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld. Ar Sought Adjournment Which Was Rejected By The Bench Considering The Fact That Assessment Has Been Made On Best Judgment Basis & The Assessee Failed To Substantiate Its Case Even Before Ld. Cit(A) Despite Being Provided With Various

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 23-10-2023 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s

Arunachalam Sivakumar, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Non Corporate Ward 2(1), Coimbatore

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1416/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Hema Muralikrishnan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 69A

assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 04-10-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer

Shri. Ramkumar Muniraju, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Bengaluru

In the result appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1142/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Shri Joseph, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Choudhry, JM: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 29.11.2023, impugned herein, passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi / Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) {in short ‘Ld. Commissioner’} under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short

The Mangalorean Garden Homes Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 23 (3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3852/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singh, The Mangalorean Garden Vs. Ito Ward 23(3) Homes Co-Operative Piramal Chamber Housing Society Limited, Mumbai - 110001 Rebello House, 132, Hill Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400050 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaaat3420G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Subhash S. Shetty Respondent By : Manish Ajudiya Date Of Hearing 04.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 04.09.2023 For A.Y. 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant & Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Contrary To The Express Provisions Of The Act & Therefore Unsustainable In Law & Facts. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Committed A Gross Error Of Law & Fact In Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Disallowing The Claim Of Deduction Of Rs.46,67,607/- Under Section 80P(2)(D) On The Ground That Appellant Has Failed To Submit Its Return Of Income Within The Stipulated Time Allowed Under Section 139(1) Of The Act. 3. The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Committed A Gross Error Of Law & Fact In Not Appreciating The Fact That The Return Of Income

For Appellant: Subhash S. ShettyFor Respondent: Manish Ajudiya

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(d)

Amarjit Singh (AM): This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, dated 04.09.2023 for A.Y. 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds before us: “1. The order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless

Digihome Solutions Prvate Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 6(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3833/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI KULDIP SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Haridas BhatFor Respondent: Manish Ajudiya

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 194C

Amarjit Singh (AM): This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, dated 20.09.2023 for A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee has raised the following grounds before us: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Kings Drugs, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 12 (1) (1), Mumbai

ITA 3827/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Mishra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Arunkumar, D.R

assessee’) by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC) [Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi] (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] qua the assessment year 2009-10 on the grounds inter-alia that :- “Grounds

Sahyadri Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 20(3)2), Mumbai

ITA 3805/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil Padvekar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Arunkumar, D.R

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

moving an application supported with an affidavit on the grounds inter-alia that the impugned order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC) [Commissioner of Income 2 M/s. Sahyadri Co-operative Credit Society Limited Tax (Appeals), Delhi] (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] was received by the assessee

Shri Vijay Suresh Dave, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panvel Circle, Panvel

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2842/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 68

ITA 2842/Mum/2023 Shri Vijay Suresh Dave IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. VIKAS AWASTHY