← 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

ITO-27(1)(5), Income Tax Office Vashi vs. J.V.Chem India, B Neelkanth Chhaya, R.B. Mehta

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2634/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhito-27(1)(5) Vs. J.V. Chem India, Room No.410, 4Th Floor, B Neelkanth Chhahya, Tower No.6, Vashi Railway R.B. Mehta Road Station, Mumbai – 400703 Ghatkopar East Maharashtra – 400077 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aabfj4268L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : S. Arunkumar Respondent By : None Date Of Hearing 28.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Revenue In Electronic Mode Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) For A.Y. 2010-11. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Lied To Appreciate The Fact That The Re-Opening Of Assessment Was Done By The Ao After Taking Prior Approval & Also Recording The Reasons That Entire Purchase Of Rs. 21,15,881/- Representing Accommodation Entries (As Per Information & Investigation Report Received From Dgit (Inv.) Mumbai, Based On Information Provided By Sales Tax Department), Should Have Been Disallowed. 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Quashing The Assessment Proceeding Witl.At Appreciating That In The Case Of Bogus Purchase Transactions, Hon'Ble Gujarat High Court Upheld The Disallowance Of 100% In The Case Of N.K. Proteins Which Was Subsequently Confirmed By The Hon'Ble Supreme Court.

For Appellant: S. ArunkumarFor Respondent: None
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

assessee, the same was understood from the reason for re-opening recorded. 5. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) NFAC on the above grounds be set aside and that of the assessing officer restored. 6. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground

Sanjeev Kumar Goel, Hapur vs. ITO Ward-3(5), Hapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3187/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14 Sanjeev Kumar Goyal, Vs. Ito, 607, Railway Road, Ward-3(5), Patel Nagar, Hapur, Hapur. Uttar Pradesh 245 101 Pan Aatpg1790N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.09.2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] whereby he confirmed the penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- imposed by the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) u/s 271B of the Income

Gd Infrabuild Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 10(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2871/DEL/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadgd Infrabuild Private Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward 10 (4), Room No.409, G.S. Building, New Delhi. Igi Airport, Terminal 1, South West Delhi, New Delhi – 110 037. (Pan : Aaccg7164J) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 16.08.2023 for the assessment year 2009-10 confirming the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short

Altaf Hafij Pathan, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 887/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Bakshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 154Section 250(6)

MEMBER Above two appeals have been filed by the assessee against orders passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 15.9.2023 and 3.10.2023 passed under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short

Altaf Hafij Pathan, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 886/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Bakshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 154Section 250(6)

MEMBER Above two appeals have been filed by the assessee against orders passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 15.9.2023 and 3.10.2023 passed under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short

Subhashbhai Narbheram Sompura, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-3(3) Now Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 213/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ld Ito. After Clicking To All The Tab Under E Proceeding Tab The Order Was There Under The

Section 249(2)(b)

assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 03-03-2023 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals], National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi dismissing the appeal for not filing the condonation of 66 days in filing the above appeal observing as follows: "As intimated

Ushaben Maganbhai Patel, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(5) Now Ward-1(2)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 210/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50Section 54BSection 54FSection 69A

SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the assessee against order dated 13.02.2023 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The CIT(A) have erred on facts

Kadva Patidar Betalis Samaj Manav Seva Samiti Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO (Exemption) Ward-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1132/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(3)Section 249(1)Section 271(1)(c)

assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 02-11-2023 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals], National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment ... interest of Principle of Natural Justice, we deem it fit to set aside the exparte appellate order passed by Ld. CIT(A), NFAC with a direction to dispose of the penalty appeal along with the quantum appeal pending before Ld. CIT(A)-9 or before NAFC, Delhi

State Organisation of Gyn and Obs of Gujarat, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO (Exemp), Bhavnagar Now the ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1126/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13 State Organization Of Gyn Ito (Exemption) & Obs Of Gujarat Bhavnagar Ama Building, Now Ito-Ward(1)(1)(3) Nr.Natraj Cinema Ahmedabad. Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aaats 9145 A (Applicant) (Responent)

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 148Section 250(6)

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by the assessee against order passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 30.10.2023 passed under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short]for the Asst.Year ... grounds raised are as under: 1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing an Ex Parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant hence the same being against the principles of natural justice and equity liable to be cancelled

Rishit Pravinbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1029/AHD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

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

Section 143(1)Section 154

I.T.A No. 1029/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2021-22 Page No 2 Rishit Pravinbhai Patel vs. ITO 2. The assessee was given hearing opportunity by Ld. NFAC on 25.08.2023, 12.09.2023 and 25.09.2023 to file its written submission in support of the grounds. The assessee sought for an adjournment on 01.09.2023 and thereafter ... responded to the notices issued by Ld. NFAC. Therefore the Ld. NFAC confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer by observing as follows: “7.2 The matter has been considered The order u/s 154 of the Act filed with Form 35 along with statement of facts and grounds of appeal

Tushar Satish Agarwal, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(1), Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 53/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath
Section 143(3)

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1059178282 (1), dated 29.12.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ... Court on 06.03.2024. [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 06th March, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The NFAC, Delhi. 4. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 5. D.R. ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. Guard File. //By Order// //// Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune

Mohammed Nasir Mohammed Yusuf Patel, Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5, Panvel

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 902/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1050134647(1), dated 26.02.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ... None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. Learned DR vehemently argued during the course of hearing that the NFAC herein has rightly refused to condone 607 days delay in filing of the assessee’s appeal filed on 18.09.2021 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment

Jawaharlal Baburam Sharma, Haryana vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1179/PUN/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Mar 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Manoj PalFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1055045214(1), dated 10.08.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard ... both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Learned DR vehemently argued during the course of hearing that the NFAC herein has rightly confirmed the assessment order of the Assessing Officer dated 18.12.2019 since the assessee failed to prove his pleadings despite notices. He, therefore, prayed that the order

Adarsh Global Trades and Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle - 2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 70/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Adarsh Global Trades & Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Services Private Limited, Central Circle – 2(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakca7278H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Sesha Srinivas, Cit-Dr 04.03.2024 Date Of Hearing: Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sesha Srinivas, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

This appeal is filed by the assessee, feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27.07.2023 for the AY 2016-17 on the following grounds : 2 2. The grounds raised by the assessee reads as under : “1.The appellate ... order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’) dated 27.07.2023 and the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (‘NFAC’) dated 28.01.2019 are illegal, erroneous, bad in law and in violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. The NFAC and the NFAC ought

Kiran Venkat Anand Sanaka, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 577/HYD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Kiran Venkat Anand Sanaka, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Bctps2882L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhandari Rajesham, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 04.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri Bhandari Rajesham, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, SR.AR
Section 143(3)Section 148

This appeal is filed by the assessee, feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27.10.2023 for the AY 2011-12 on the following grounds : 2 2. The grounds raised by the assessee reads as under ... r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 4. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the assessing officer, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, who dismissed the appeal of assessee on account of non-prosecution and on merits. 5. Feeling aggrieved with the order of ld.CIT(A), assessee

Britannia Industries Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 462/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35(1)(i)Section 43BSection 56(2)(x)Section 80J

verification of the case records revealed that the electronic assessment records of the assessment , which was conducted in a faceless manner by the NFAC, was also never called for by the ld. PCIT and he simply followed the ld. Assessing Officer proposal and issued show-cause notice under section ... acquisitions of leasehold land, building and the freehold land for considerations which were lower than the stamp duty value, had been furnished before the NFAC. The said facts were disclosed in the Notes to Tax Audit Report and the Notes filed alongwith the return of income, which were filed before

Rising Tradecom Private Limited., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1265/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 Rising Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 4Th Floor, 23B N. S. Road, Vs. 4(1), Kolkata. Dalhousie, Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Aaecr4178B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 144

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/250/2023-24/1057437316(1) dated 27.10.2023 passed against the assessment order by ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata u/s.144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... March, 2024 JD, Sr. P.S. 6 Raising Tradecom Pvt. Ltd., AY 2012-13 Copy to: 1. The Appellant: 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata //// By Order

Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1161/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Years: 2011-12 Silkina Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6, Waterloo Street, Kolkata- Vs. 3(3), Kolkata. 700069. (Pan: Aaecs5627C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 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/250/2023-24/1057291238(1) dated 23.10.2023 passed against the assessment order by ITO, Ward-3(3), Kolkata u/s.147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ... March, 2024 (Sonjoy Sarma) Accountant Member Dated: 06th March, 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

Elizebeth Simaputhran, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), International Taxation, Chennai

In the result, ITA No.906/Chny/2023 stand allowed for statistical purposes whereas ITA No

ITA 907/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Dasआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.906/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.907/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Mrs. Elizabeth Sima Puthran Ito Prop. M/S. Puthran & Associates Ward-(1) बनाम No.B3, 5/7, Kesavan Orchid, International Taxation, / Vs. North Mada Street, Sri Nagar Colony, Chennai. Saidapet , Chennai-600 015. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaepe-0124-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T.Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar. V. Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)- Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri T.Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)- Ld. Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार

Elizabeth Simaputhran, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward-1(1) International Taxation, Chennai

In the result, ITA No.906/Chny/2023 stand allowed for statistical purposes whereas ITA No

ITA 906/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Dasआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.906/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.907/Chny/2023 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Mrs. Elizabeth Sima Puthran Ito Prop. M/S. Puthran & Associates Ward-(1) बनाम No.B3, 5/7, Kesavan Orchid, International Taxation, / Vs. North Mada Street, Sri Nagar Colony, Chennai. Saidapet , Chennai-600 015. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaepe-0124-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T.Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar. V. Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)- Ld. Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri T.Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)- Ld. Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार