← 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur vs. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd., Raipur

In the result ground 2 of the CO

ITA 182/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.181/Rpr/2023 (Ay-2010-2011) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 182/Rpr/2023 (Ay:2011-2012) आयकरअपीलसं. /Ita No. 183/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2012-2013) आयकरअपीलसं. /Ita No. 184/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2013-2014) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 185/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2014-2015) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 186/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2015-2016) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 187/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2017-2018) आयकरअपीलसं. /Ita No. 188/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2018-2019) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Circle-1(1), Raipur S Company Limited, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Vidhyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur Pan: Aadcc6047K & Cross Objection No. 10/Rpr/2023 (2011-12) Cross Objection No. 11/Rpr/2023 (2012-13) Cross Objection No. 12/Rpr/2023 (2014-15) Cross Objection No. 13/Rpr/2023 (2015-16) Cross Objection No. 14/Rpr/2023 (2018-19) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution V Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Raipur S Vidhyut Seva Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Daganiya, Raipur Pan: Aadcc6047K (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Praveen Goyal, Ca'S राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By : Shri Debashish Lahiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2023

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Khandelwal & PraveenFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)

case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of depreciation amounting to Rs. 2,75,10,633/-. 2. On the facts and circumstances off the case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the addition ... case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of depreciation amounting to Rs. 41,80,50,564/- 2. On the facts and circumstances off the case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the addition

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur vs. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd., Raipur

In the result ground 2 of the CO

ITA 181/RPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.181/Rpr/2023 (Ay-2010-2011) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 182/Rpr/2023 (Ay:2011-2012) आयकरअपीलसं. /Ita No. 183/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2012-2013) आयकरअपीलसं. /Ita No. 184/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2013-2014) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 185/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2014-2015) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 186/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2015-2016) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 187/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2017-2018) आयकरअपीलसं. /Ita No. 188/Rpr/2023(Ay: 2018-2019) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Circle-1(1), Raipur S Company Limited, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Vidhyut Seva Bhawan, Daganiya, Raipur Pan: Aadcc6047K & Cross Objection No. 10/Rpr/2023 (2011-12) Cross Objection No. 11/Rpr/2023 (2012-13) Cross Objection No. 12/Rpr/2023 (2014-15) Cross Objection No. 13/Rpr/2023 (2015-16) Cross Objection No. 14/Rpr/2023 (2018-19) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution V Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Raipur S Vidhyut Seva Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Daganiya, Raipur Pan: Aadcc6047K (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Praveen Goyal, Ca'S राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By : Shri Debashish Lahiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2023

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Khandelwal & PraveenFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)

case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of depreciation amounting to Rs. 2,75,10,633/-. 2. On the facts and circumstances off the case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the addition ... case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of depreciation amounting to Rs. 41,80,50,564/- 2. On the facts and circumstances off the case whether the Id. CIT(A), NFAC was justified in deleting the addition

Shailaja Lalit Kotian, Mumbai vs. Central Processing Centrem Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2960/MUM/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2960/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shailaja Lalit Kotian बिधम/ Central Processing B/25, 6Th Floor, Namaskar Center, Income Tax Vs. Maas Chs, Poonam Nagar, Department, Bengalure Mumbai-400093. Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra (E) Room No.615, Mumbai-400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agipk3192M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Jeetan Nagpal/Shri Sujit Kotian/Shri Ali Sayyed Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 29.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appellate Order Dated 29.06.2023 [‘The Impugned Order’] Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [‘The Hon'Ble Cit(A)’] Is Based Upon Conjectures, Surmises & Assuming Incorrect Facts & Therefore, Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Jeetan Nagpal/Shri SujitFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 199Section 234A

VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/(NFAC), Delhi dated 29.06.2023 for the assessment year 2022-23. 2. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. That on the facts and circumstances ... case and in law, the appellate order dated 29.06.2023 [‘the impugned order’] passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘the Hon'ble CIT(A)’] is based upon conjectures, surmises and assuming incorrect facts and therefore, is bad in law. 2. That on the facts and circumstances

Bhupendrakumar Balvantlal Gandhi, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 687/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.687/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) Bhupendrakumar Balvantlal Income Tax Officer, Ward- Gandhi 1(3)(1), Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. 36 Jai Ambe Society, B/H Arjun Majura Gatre, Surat-395001 Complex, Bhatar Road, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agapg 3261 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca िनधा"रती की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 11/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/12/2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short, “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 11.08.2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3)(1), Surat, Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’), Dated 18.03.2016. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Reopening Assessment U/S 147 Of Ethe Act By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The It Act 1961. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer By Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.13,79,000/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit.

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, "SMC” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.687/SRT/2023

Ial Logistics India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle- 5(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 793/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.793/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ial Logistics India Pvt. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(2)(1) Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. 6Th Floor, Kalpataru Court, C Gidwani Marg, Chembur, Mumbai-400074. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacm3123B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri S. N Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 25.01.2023 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. None Appeared For Assessee. However A Perusal Of The Records Reveals That The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Addition Of Rs.8,27,200/- As Undisclosed Business Income.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. N Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee company against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/(NFAC), Delhi dated 25.01.2023 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. None appeared for assessee. However a perusal of the records reveals that the main grievance