“NFAC”

Mohd Shafi Isamail Merchant, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(2)(1), Piramal Chamber

Bench: SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. The Assessee has preferred the present appeal against the Order, dated 24/12/2024, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’], under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], whereby ... terms of First Proviso to Section 251 the Act. 2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. That while ld. NFAC(A) set-aside the case back to NFAC(A), failed to appreciate and resolving the grounds of appeal that this reopening by the ld. AO is without

Bhavesh Harjiram Solanki, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee are allowed, in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

aranr atiieta aftpeor ara tie Hag FI IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH

Jagannath Co-Operative Credit Society, Kurla (East) vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 41(1)(2), Kautaliya Bhavan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

challenging the impugned order dt. 08.09.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following rolls of appeal. 1 On the facts and in the circumstances ... appellant Society. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer as well as NFAC has failed to appreciate that the appellant Society exclusively engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to the members and in order to comply

Jai Bhavani Reti Utpadak Sahakari Sanstha Ltd, Virar vs. Thane 4(1), Ashar It Park Thane

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Jai Bhavani Reti Utpadak Sahakari Ito,Ward-4(1), Thane Sanstha Ltd. Vs Ashar It Park, Thane, At Naringi Post Virar, Vasai-Virar, Maharashtra – 400602. Maharashtra – 401201. [Pan No. Aaatj6207E] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Physical hearing) Jai Bhavani Reti

M/S. Centrix Technologies Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Circle 1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Prusethm/S. Centrix Technologies Vs. Ito-Circle 1(2)(1), Mumbai Private Limited. (Old Jurisdiction-Ito-W1(4), Hyderabad), 7Th Floor, Office No.715, Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai- 400020. Samarth Aishwarya, Mumbai-400053. Pan/Gir No:Aabcc7117Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘Act’) by the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre[in short, ‘CIT(A), NFAC’], Delhi, dated 18.09.2025 for the assessment year (AY)2013-14. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assesseeare as under: “1. The assessment order

Sanjay Gopaldas Bajaj, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-12(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

raising following grounds:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) erred in upholding the denial of deduction claimed u/s.54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, amounting to Rs.67,91,537/-The appellant contends that the entire Long ... deduction should have been allowed despite the delay in filing the original return u/s.139 due to unforeseen circumstances. That the order passed by the NFAC (Appeals), Delhi dated 18.09.2025, confirming the addition of Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) and denying deduction under section 54 of the Income

Diamond Tradecom Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 12(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prabhash Shankardiamond Tradecom V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Private Limited बनाम 12(2)(1), Room No. 147B, Shop No.1, Shiv Ganga Chs Aayakar Bhavan,M.K. Road, Ltd., Ram Kuwar Thakur Mumbai – 400020, Road, Dahisar (East), Maharashtra Mumbai – 400 068, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaccd8131A Appellant/अपीलाथी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

onwards. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi erred in dismissing the grounds of appeal for non prosecution and non-attendance by the appellant without disposing off each ground of appeal

Smt. Urmila Dhelia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

challenging the impugned order dt. 04.06.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following rolls of appeal. 1. The ground or grounds of appeal ... cannot be sustained and thus relied upon the following decisions: 3 Smt Urmila Dhelia, Mumbai. 1. Saltwater Studio LLP v/s. NFAC Delhi, 157 taxmann.com 749 [2023] (Mumbai-Trib) 2. Kishor Digambar Patil v/s. Income Tax Officer, 149 taxmann.com 502 [2023] (Pune-Trib) 3. Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP v/s. NFAC

ITO-1(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Vishwas Rayons Private Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Hon’Ble Shri Om Prakash Kantito- 1(3)(4) Vs. Vishwas Rayons Private Room No. 528, 5Th Floor, Limited Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Room No. 19, 3Rd Floor Mumbai- 400020 6 M.K. Amin Marg, Bora Bazar Street, Fort, Mumbai- 400001 Pan/Gir No. Aadcv1302N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assesseeby Shri. Rasesh Shah Revenue By Ms. Kavitha Kaushik,Sr.Dr. Date Of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Challenging The Impugned Order 23.12.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Following Grounds Are Reproduced Below: “1. I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee & Deleting The Addition Of Rs.3,62,27,500/- Made By The Ao Under I The Provisions Of Section 68 Of The 2 Vishwas Rayons Private Limited

revenue challenging the impugned order 23.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2014-15. The following grounds are reproduced below: “1. i) On the facts and circumstances of the case ... Private Limited 68 of the Act on the ground that the genuineness of the transaction was not proved. However, on appeal, Ld CIT(A) / NFAC after evaluating the entire facts, circumstances and documentary evidences, had deleted the additions. 6. After perusal of the entire record placed before us we notice

Sunil Ghanshyamdas Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle- 42(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusheth

GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 12.08.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the A.Y 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and the circumstances

Vidya Buildcon Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Khodpia, AM: The aforesaid appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [for short “ld. CIT(A)”] both dated 24.06.2024 for the AY Assessment Years (AY) 2010-11 & 2011-12. Being both the appeals

Vidya Buildcon Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 8 (3) (3), Aayakar Bhavan

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Khodpia, AM: The aforesaid appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [for short “ld. CIT(A)”] both dated 24.06.2024 for the AY Assessment Years (AY) 2010-11 & 2011-12. Being both the appeals