← 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

Aark Infosoft Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 681/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Aark Infosoft Private Limited, The Acit, 45, Shetrunjay, 2Nd Floor, Above Circle-1(1)(1), Central Bank Of India, Bhattha Ahmedabad Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380007 Pan : Aahca 9986 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 27.07.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esic Of Rs.5,51,657/- U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act?

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 269SSection 36(1)Section 40Section 68

GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Present appeal has been filed by the assessee against order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short] dated 27.07.2023 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred

Hitendra Dilipsinh Jadeja, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 66/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2017-18 Hitendra Dilipsinh Jadeja The Ito 4, Sanjay Park Society Vs Ward-3(2)(2) Nr.Jogni Mata Temple Ahmedabad Sanand Ahmedabad – 382 110 Gujarat Pan: Agfpj1666A अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms. Suchitra Kamblethis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19/10/2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)” In Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR
Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 44ASection 68

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order dated 19/10/2022 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)” in short] for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under ... अपीलाथ" / The Appellant 2. ""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु"त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु"त ( अपील ) / The CIT(A)-(NFAC) 5. "वभागीय ""त"न"ध , आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण , राजोकट/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, 6. गाड" फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"या"पत

Shashikant Baburao Bhosale, Kolhapur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) Income Tax Department, Kolhapur

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

ITA 895/PUN/2023[AY 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G.D. Padmahshalishashikant Baburao Bhosale, Vs Ito, Ward-1(5), 766/1A, Opp. Old Octroi Kolhapur. Naka, Sai Prasad Nivas, Kalamba Road, Kolhapur. Pan: Agwpb 3883 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Mahesh Samant, Ar Revenue By : Shri Gaurav K. Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02/2024 Order Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 11.07.2023 For A.Y.2011-12 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Samant, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav K. Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

pronouncement : 21/02/2024 ORDER Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, dated 11.07.2023 for A.Y.2011-12 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. In this case, assessee had not filed his return of income ... assessment u/sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act . 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the NFAC, where also, assessee remained absent though many opportunities had been granted to him. Therefore, NFAC following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court