“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

Tejpal, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Faridabad

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

ITA 3172/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi15 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. S. S. Nagar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 249(4)(b)

Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.09.2023. 2. The appeal of the assessee has not been admitted by the ld. CIT(A) invoking the provisions of Section 249(4)(b), while

Mst Manufacturing Technologies Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Gurgaon

ITA 1983/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Delhi15 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2021-22 Mst Manufacturing Vs. Ito Technologies Private Ward- 3 (1) Limited, 78A, Sector-5, Imt Gurgaon Manesar, Gurgaon-122050 Pan No.Aakcm7564N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Ved Jain, Advocate Ms. Uma Upadhyay, Ca Respondent By Sh.Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 15/02/2024 Order

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 24

12/02/2024 Date of Pronouncement: 15/02/2024 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 25.05.2023 by NFAC, Delhi pertaining to A.Y. 2021-22. 2. The grievance of the assessee read as under :- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Kasturbhai A. Patel, Sabarkantha vs. The ITO, Ward-4, Himatnagar

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

ITA 990/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 990/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16)

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 249Section 250Section 69A

instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 05.12.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward-4, Himatnagar, under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income ... Kasturbhai A. Patel vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 2 – 2. The appellant has come up in appeal against the order dated 19.01.2013 passed by NFAC, Delhi, whereby and whereunder the addition of Rs.15,85,000/- made by the Ld. AO under Section 69A of the Act has been upheld. Though

Charumatiben Jitendra Mehta Legal Heir of Late Jitendra Narottamdas Mehta, Thane vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal preferred by the appellant is allowed

ITA 961/AHD/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), Ms. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. DR

Section 271(1)(c)

instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.11.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the penalty order dated 13.03.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhavnagar, under Section 271(1)(c) r.w.s ... that, the order of penalty dated 13.03.2019 was issued in the name of deceased followed by the order impugned passed on 22.11.2023 by the NFAC, Delhi. In that view of the matter, the order is liable to be quashed as was the crux of the submissions made

Value 4 Money Financial Services, Vadodara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(3), Vadodara (Now ITO, Ward 3(1)(4), Vadodara)

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

ITA 946/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 946/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17)

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 18.12.2018 passed by the ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), ITA No. 946/Ahd/2023 (Value 4 Money Financial Services ... referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The appellant has come up in appeal against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 29.09.2023 for A.Y. 2016-17 which is admittedly ex parte one. In fact, the appellant was issued notice only on 12.09.2023 informing

Dipikaben Ashwinbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 926/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 926/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) Dipikaben Ashwinbhai The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Shah Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. 2488 Navo Vas, Nr. Swaminarayan Temple, Kalupur, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adkps6235N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Nirav Malkan, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/02/2024

For Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)

instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 10.11.2016 passed by the ITO, Ward-1(2)(1), Ahmedabad, under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment

Chintan Bharatbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, impugned order is set-aside and appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 678/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 678/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18)

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 272A(1)(d)Section 69

instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.02.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 17.02.2022 passed by the NFAC, Delhi, under Section 272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred ... been filed before us with the following contentions: “Appellant has filed an appeal before Hon'ble ITAT against order passed by the CIT (A). NFAC Delhi for AY 2017-18 on 06.09.2023. Appellant has not been served penalty order passed by Ld CIT(A). While going through the ITBA portal

Shreeomsingh Bhagwansingh Rawat, Vadodara vs. The ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru Present Juridiction the Dy.CIT Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 514/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2020-21 Shreeomsingh Bhagwansingh The Dy.Cit Rawat Vs Circle-1(1)(1) 905/6, Gidc Makarpura Vadodara Vadodara 390 010 Pan: Aampr 5475 L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Parimalsinh B.Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/02/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms.Suchitra Kamblethis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25/04/2023 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 2020-21. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B.Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order dated 25/04/2023 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 2020-21. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: “1. The learned ... अपीलाथ" / The Appellant 2. ""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु"त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु"त ( अपील ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC-Delhi) 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

Shrenik Hiralal Shah, Vadodara, Gujarat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara, Gujarat

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

ITA 1130/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Shrenik Hiralal Shah The Asstt.Cit 5/A Vrundavan Bungalows Vs Circle-1(1)91) Near Mathura Nagari, Tandalja Vadodara Vadodara -390 020 Gujarat, India Pan: Apnps 0058 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms.Amrion Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Makwana, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/02/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms. Suchitra Kamblethis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31/10/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Cit(A)” In Short] For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Ms.Amrion Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Makwana, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 24Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order dated 31/10/2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“CIT(A)” in short] for Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: “All the grounds of appeal in this appeal ... Parte Order: Shrenik Hiralal Shah vs. ACIT Asst.Year 2010-11 1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi (‘NFAC’) ('the CIT’(A)' ) erred in fact and in law in passing the order ex-parte. 2) The learned CIT(A) erred in fact

Divyeshkumar L.Kachhiya, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anand

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

ITA 1065/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1065/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Divyeshkumar L. The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Kachhiya Ward-1, Anand Vs. Bhat Pipli, Umreth, Anand Gujarat, 388220 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Bqfpk5153G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri M. K. Patel, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/02/2024 14/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.10.2023 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Arising Out Of The Order Dated 28.11.2018 Passed By The Ito, Ward-3, Anand, Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 3 Days. Considering The Merit Of The Matter, We Condone The Delay In Preferring Such Appeal Before Us.

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr. DR

Section 147

instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.10.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 28.11.2018 passed by the ITO, Ward-3, Anand, under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income ... 1065/Ahd/2023 (Divyeshkumar L. Kachhiya vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2011-12 - 2 – 3. The appellant before us has challenged the order passed by the NFAC dated 16.10.2023 arising out of the order dated 20.11.2018 passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act passed

Shrikant Gajanan Vyavahare, Kamatwade vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 893/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.893/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shrikant Gajanan Vyavahare, The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.06, S.No.16/3/1, V Nashik. Samarth Bungla, Near S Modakeshwar Mandir, Modakeshwar Nagar, Kamatwade, Nashik – 422010. Pan: Aakpv1138N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Miss Abhilasha Sanjay Pawar – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 14/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/02/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit Is Not Justified In Levying Penalty U/S 271(L)(C) Of Rs.82,093/- On The Ground That The Assesses Has Furnish Inaccurate Particulars Of Income Without Appreciating That The Said Levy Of Penalty Was Not Justified In Law. Shrikant Gajanan Vyavahare [A]

Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 271

ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 29.09.2022. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The learned ... does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution. 6. In view of this, the order of the ld.CIT(A)[NFAC] is set-aside to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The ld.CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee

Mr Sunil Shankar Bandal, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward.2(5), Pune

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1105/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1105/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mr.Sunil Shankar Bandal, The Income Tax Officer, At Post Bavdhan Bk, Taluka V Ward-2(5), Pune. Mulshi, Pune – 411021. S Pan: Ajkpb8627M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 14/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 14/02/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 22.08.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions & Scheme Of The Act It Be Held That The Assessment Proceedings Initiated U/S 147 Of The Act Are Time Barred Since The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Act Is Served After 6 Years. Accordingly, The Assessment Proceedings So Initiated Be Kindly Quashed & Appellant Be Granted Just & Proper Relief In This Respect. Mr. Sunil Shankar Bandal [A]

Section 129Section 147Section 148Section 250

ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 22.08.2023. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On facts ... grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” Submission of ld.AR : 2. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A)[NFAC] had not adjudicated each ground of the assessee and merely dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The ld.AR submitted that the notices issued by ld.CIT

Tarigonda Shavathali Khan, Kalakada vs. ITO., Ward-1(1), Tirupati

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 79/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.79/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Tarigonda Shavathali Vs. Income Tax Officer Khan, Chittoor Ward 1(1) Pan:Albpt1206F Chittoor (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Pradeep Raj Kuna, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.11.2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Assessee Has Already E-Filed The Appeal Against The Very Same First Appellate Order Before The Tribunal & Therefore, Prayed That This Appeal Has To Be Withdrawn Being A Duplicate Appeal. In Absence Of Any Objection From The Side Of The Learned Dr, This Appeal Filed By The Page 1 Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Raj Kuna, CAFor Respondent: : Shri R. Kumaran, DR

ORDER Per R.K. Panda, Vice-President. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.11.2023 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC, Delhi, relating to A.Y.2017-18. 2. At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has already e-filed

Tarigonda Shavathali Khan, Kalakada vs. ITO., Ward No-1(1), Tirupathi

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

ITA 23/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.23/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Tarigonda Shavathali Vs. Income Tax Officer Khan, Chittoor Ward 1(1) Pan:Albpt1206F Tirupati (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Pradeep Raj Kuna, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri R. Kumaran, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/02/2024

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Raj Kuna, CAFor Respondent: : Shri R. Kumaran, DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

ORDER Per R.K. Panda, Vice-President. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23/11/2023 of the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi, relating to A.Y. 2017-18. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order ... learned CIT(A)NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.1,50,03,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A being unexplained cash deposits and Rs.1,67,534/-towards interest income as “income from other sources”. Page 1 of 8 ITA No 23 of 2024 Tarigonda Shavathali Khan 3. Facts

Srinivas Cheedara, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 669/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.669/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Srinivas Cheedara Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 9(4) Pan:Aeapc3856J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri S. Mookambikeyan, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Ex-Parte Order Dated 25.10.2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)- Nfac Delhi Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Ex-Parte Order Of The Learned Cit (A) Nfac In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.53,41,600/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 69A R.W.S.115Bbe Of The I.T. Act Being The Cash Deposits In The Bank Account As Unexplained Money.

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri S. Mookambikeyan, DR

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

Panda, Vice-President. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex-parte order dated 25.10.2023 of the learned CIT (A)- NFAC Delhi Hyderabad, relating to A.Y.2017-18. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order ... learned CIT (A) NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.53,41,600/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A r.w.s.115BBE of the I.T. Act being the cash deposits in the Bank Account as unexplained money. 3. There is a delay of 6 days in filing of the appeal

Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad vs. Dhobba Madhavi, Hyderabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue and the C

ITA 614/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.614/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer Vs. Smt. Dhobba Madhavi, Ward 8(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Cqspm2066A C.O No.1/Hyd/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.614/Hyd/2023 (A.Y 2017-18) (Appellant) (Respondent) Smt. Dhobba Madhavi, Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 8(1) Pan:Cqspm2066A Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा /Assessee By:: Shri P. Prasad, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-. This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.11.2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Also Filed The Cross Objection Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: : Shri P. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

ORDER Per R.K. Panda, Vice-President. This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 28.11.2023 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC, Delhi, relating to A.Y.2017-18. The assessee has also filed the Cross Objection against the appeal filed by the Revenue. For the sake of convenience, these ... Assessing Officer, invoking the provisions of section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE, brought the same to tax. 3. Before the learned CIT (A) NFAC, the assessee filed certain details based on which the learned CIT (A) NFAC directed the Assessing Officer to estimate the income from Page

Anil Kumar Tanwar, Bhiwadi vs. ITO Bhiwadi, Bhiwadi

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

ITA 36/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Nfac/ Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), But The Nfac Has Failed To Consider It & Passed The Order On Dated 20.11.2023 & Dismiss The Appeal Which Deserved To Be Accepted.

For Appellant: Sh. P C Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

This appeal filed by assessee is arising out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 20/11/2023 [here in after (NFAC)/ ld. CIT(A) ] for assessment year 2009-10 which in turn arise from the order dated 22.02.2016 passed under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income ... following grounds: - 2 Anil Kumar Tanwar vs. ITO “1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the assessee has submitted the document before NFAC/ Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), but the NFAC has failed to consider it and passed the order on dated 20.11.2023 and dismiss the appeal which

Shri Krishnaraj Buildhome Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

ITA 753/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Sharma (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43CSection 50

There are two appeal filed by the assessee aggrieved from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Here in after referred as (NFAC)] both for the assessment year 2014-15 and dated 06.12.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the ITO, Ward 2(2), Jaipur ... Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Learned CIT(A). the Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, vide order dated 06/12/2023, dismissed the appeal of the assessee without appreciating the facts of the case and the detailed submission made by the assessee. Aggrieved with the order

Shri Krishnaraj Buildhome Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

ITA 752/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Sharma (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43CSection 50

Ajay Bairagi, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Kota

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

ITA 641/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

filed an appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 29-08-2023, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18 wherein the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal. ‘’1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case