“ NFAC ”

127 Taxmann.com 637 · High Court

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

Hire Purchase (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC

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.

128 Taxmann.com 190 · High Court

Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP v. NFAC

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.

142 Taxmann.com 38 · 2022 · High Court

Vinodkumar Lakshmipathi v. CIT (Appeals) NFAC

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.

145 Taxmann.com 235 · 2022 · ITAT

Alrameez Construction (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC

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.

152 Taxmann.com 382 · 2023 · ITAT

366 ITR 18 · 2014 · High Court

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

Saltwater Studio LLP v. NFAC

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.

157 Taxmann.com 749 · 2023 · Reported

ITA 867/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

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

Somashekhar Virupax Umarami L/H Smt. Latharani . S Umarani, Hubballi vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hubli

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15 Somashekhar Virupax Umarani L/H Smt. Latharani S. Umarani Umarani Annexe Behind Hosur Jain Temple, Ito Vs. Near Chetana Weigh Bridge Ncm Ward-2(4) Hubballi 580 029 Hubli Karnataka Pan No : Aadpu0417E Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Chaitanya V. Mudrabettu, A.R. Respondent By : Shri Subramanian S., D.R. Date Of Hearing : 25.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.01.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Cit(A) Dated 31.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya V. Mudrabettu, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., D.R

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 271ASection 68Section 69ASection 69B

ITA No.867/Bang/2023 Somashekhar Virupax Umarani, Hubballi IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT

M/S. Itc Employees Housing Co-Operative Society Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(2)(4), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1033/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Itc Employees Housing Co-Operative Vs. Ito, Society Ltd., Ward – 1(2)(4), #252, 1St Floor 4Th Cross, Bengaluru. Banaswadi Main Road, Subbarayanapalya, Bengaluru – 560 033. Pan : Aaaa 0532 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. V. Srinivasan & Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. V. Parithivel, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan and Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 63(16)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Karnataka Co- operative Societies Act, 1959, for the relevant Assessment Year. Assessee submits that a copy of the same was uploaded before the FAA (NFAC). However, the same was not taken note of by the CIT(A) and a decision was taken against the assessee. In the interest of justice

Sai Diamonds, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle - 19(3), Mumbai

ITA 3165/MUM/2023[20012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Mrugakshi K. JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Shreekala Pardeshi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

present appeal the Assessee has challenged the order, 1. dated 22/08/2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 2012-13, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal

Saimaa Technologies LLP, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-14(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3034/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry & Shri Gagan Goyal & Saimaa Technologies Llp, 11, Ground Floor, C-Wing, Building No. 1, Kailas Industrial Company, Veer Savarkar Marg, Park Site, Vikhroli (West) Maharashtra -400 079 ...... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri B. V. Jhaveri &For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Parwani, Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

hearing : 21/12/2023 Date of pronouncement : 25/01/2024 PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: These appeals by assessee are directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.07.2021 u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for A.Y. 2021-22 respectively. The assessee has raised ... ACIT [(2022) Taxpub (DT) 1975] (ii) Vithal Srinivasan v ADIT, CPC in ITA No. 1087/Bang/2022 (iii) Sonakshi Sinha v. (ITCA) NFAC, in ITA No. 1704/Mum/2022 dated 20/09/2022 (iv) Priya Savina Murzello v DCIT, CPC in ITA No.3238/Mum/2022 dated 17/02/2023 14. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals), NFAC

Albert Santan Dcosta, Thane vs. ITO, Ward1(1), Thane

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

ITA 2851/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri.Narender Kumar Choudhry () & Miss. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 73

Choudhry (JM): This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee, against the order dated 23/06/2023 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short, ‘Ld. Commissioner’) under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2011- 12. 2 ITA 2851/Mum/2023 Albert Santan

Vineet Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent . Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2428/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHRY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

Vineeet Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2427/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHRY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

Chawala Enterpries, Meerut vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(4), Meerut

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 2610/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 69A

BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 24.07.2023, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. On the fact

Iindus Towers Limited, Gurgaon vs. Ac, Circle 10(1), New Dehi

ITA 2235/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usindus Towers Ltd, Vs. Assistant Director Of 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity Income Tax, Cpc, Building No. 10, Tower- Bangalore, A, Dlf Qe So, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcb0274F

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kr. Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 250

BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order u/s 250, of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 08.06.2023. 2. At the outset the Ld. AR requested for withdrawal of the appeal preferred by it and took our attention to letter dated

Ankit Chaudhary, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Ward 3(1)(2), Muzaffarnagar

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

ITA 149/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2012-13 Ankit Chaudhary, Vs Ito, C/O Ashish Agarwal, Advocate, Ward 3(1)(2), Raj Complex, Arya Samaj Road, Muzaffarnagar. Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh - 251001. Pan: Agzpc0818R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Prem Prakash & Shri Ashish Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By : Shri R.K. Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2023 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Is Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.12.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Muzaffarnagar/10148/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 03.12.2019 Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’) By The Ito, Ward-1(1), Muzaffarnagar (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Prem Prakash, &For Respondent: Shri R.K. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This is appeal preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 14.12.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No.CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar/10148/2019-20 arising out of the appeal before it against

Habibali Kamrudin Vakil, Bhavnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 866/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)

from the appellate order, the physical appeal was filed by the assessee was then migrated to the National Faceless Appeal Centre and the Ld. NFAC has not sent physical hearing notices to the assessee. 5. Therefore in order to meet the ends of Principle of Natural Justice, we deem ... aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC with a direction to issue the physical hearing notice to the assessee and decide the appeal on merits by giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee should I.T.A No. 866/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2016-17 Page

Rajesh Kanaiyalal Gandhi, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(3) Now Ward-3(1)(4), Vadodara

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 643/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year: 2015-16 Rajesh Kanaiyalal Gandhi, Vs Income Tax Officer, 01, Shree Krishna Building, Ward-3(1)(3), Madanzampa Road, Opp. Moti (Now Ward 3(1)(4)), Tamboliwad, Patthar Gate, Vadodara Vaoddara-390001 Pan : Afhpg 3235 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Viranch Modi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Aashish Rajesh Revar, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri Viranch Modi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aashish Rajesh Revar, Sr DR

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short] dated 24.06.2023 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred

Nasimbanu S Kothiya, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 622/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt.Year :2017-18 Nasimbanu S. Kothiya Ito, Ward-5(3)(4) 201, Paradise Park Vs Ahmedabad. Khoja Society Nr. Vemandir, Kankaria Maninagar, Ahmedabad. Pan : Bbxpk 4772 N

For Appellant: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

dated 16.6.2023,pertaining to Asst.Year 2017-18. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under: i) Learned CIT (A) (NFAC) has erred in passing order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act. ii) Notice for hearing issued by CIT (A) for hearing on 29/05/2023 is not properly served

Amikrupa Education Trust, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward Exemption, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 581/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Final Appeal. Total Tax Effect (See Note Below) Rs. 40,90,878/-

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69A

pronouncement : 24-01-2024 आदेश/ORDER This is an appeal filed against the order dated 21-04- 2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is against

Nirma Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 487/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2013-14 Nirma Chemical Works Pvt. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Ltd. V. Tax Nirma House Circle-3(1)(1) Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Near Income Tax Circle Gujarat Ahmedabad-380 009 Gujarat Pan: Aaacn 5353 L अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ"/ (Respondent) थ" Assessee By : Shri Hemanshu Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/01/2024 & 23.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Coram: This Appeal Filed By Assessee Is Directed Against The Appellate Order Dated 19/05/2022 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Cit(A)” In Short] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Assessment Year 2013-14 (Din & Order No.Itba/ Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1043081956(1)), The Appellate Proceedings Have Arisen Before Ld.Cit(A) From Rectification Order Dated 16/02/2022 Passed By Ld. Assessing Officer(Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 154 Of The 1961 Act (Din & Order Nirma Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. V. Dcit Ay 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Hemanshu Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 250Section 253(6)(c)Section 253(6)(d)

यथ" / The Respondent. Nirma Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT AY 2013-14 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned CIT 4. ( ) / The CIT(A)-(NFAC)-Delhi आयकर आयु" अपील 5. , , राजोकट/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, िवभागीय "ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण 6. गाड" फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"यािपत "ित //// सहायक

Globe Textiles (India) P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 455/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

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

ITA 454/AHD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

above four appeals have been filed by the assessee against orders passed by the Ld.Commissioner of Income- Tax(Appeals),National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “ld.CIT(A)of even dated i.e. 18.10.2022under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short

Globe Textiles (India) P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

ITA 453/AHD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Globe Textiles (India) P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

ITA 452/AHD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Globe Textiles (India) P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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