← 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

Perumal Saravanan, Hosur vs. ITO Ward, Hosur

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

ITA 1593/CHNY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jan 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1593/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shri Perumal Saravanan, The Income Tax Officer, 22/1A, Durga Nagar, Vs. Ward 1, Anumepalli Agragaram, Hosur Zuzuwadi, Hosur – 635 126. Pan: Axbps 5561L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1054657334(1) Dated 27.07.2023. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Hosur For The Assessment Year 2021-22 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’), Vide Order Dated 15.12.2022. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Barred By Limitation By 93 Days. The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 27.07.2023 Was Received By The Assessee On 27.07.2023 As Per Form 36. The Appeal Has To Be Filed On Or Before 25.09.2023 But Was Filed Only On 27.12.2023. The Assessee Has Filed Affidavit Along With Condonation Petition Stating The Reason That There Is A Failure On The Part Of The Consultant Or Tax Advisor To Inform The Assessee Of Passing Of Ex-Parte Order As Well As Delay In Filing The Present Appeal. In View Of The Above Reason, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(3)

VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1054657334(1) dated 27.07.2023. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Hosur for the assessment year

R Kamalakannan, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp. Ward 4(6), Chennai

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

ITA 1354/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1354/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Shri R. Kamalakannan, The Income Tax Officer, No.85, Avvaiyar Cross Street, Non-Corporate Ward-4(6), Metha Nagar, Chennai. Madavaram Milk Colony, Chennai-600 051. [Pan: Afmpk 7211 A] (अपीलाथ$/Appellant) (%&थ$/Respondent) अपीलाथ$ की ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. S. Vidya, Ca %&थ$ की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of : 29.01.2024 Pronouncement

For Appellant: Ms. S. Vidya, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 192ASection 234B

appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), dated 31.10.2023, and pertains to assessment year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: :: 2 :: 1. The Order ... Honourable Commissioner of Income Tax, NFAC (CITA in short) is without jurisdiction, is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case and is opposed to the principles of natural justice, equity and fair play. 2. For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the order