“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

Sreeni Parameswaran, Ernakulam vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Kochi

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

ITA 186/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dassreeni Parameswaran Asst. Cit, 7/42 – B5, Mystic Bells Corporate Circle- 2(1) Villa No. 1, Eroor Desom Kochi Nadama Village Vs. Ernakulam 682308 [Pan: Bahps6202C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms. K. Krishna, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2023 O R D E R Per:Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Agitating The Order Dated 20.01.2023 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac), Dismissing His Appeal Contesting His Assessment Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter "The Act") Dated 28.03.2016 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12. 2. The Only Issue Arising In The Instant Appeal Is The Validity Or Otherwise In Law, In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Of The Addition By Way Of Deemed Dividend U/S. 2(22)(E) Of The Act For Rs. 62,44,215,Since Confirmed In The First Appeal.

For Appellant: Ms. K. Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 2(22)(e)

Sanjay Arora, AM This is an appeal by the assessee agitating the order dated 20.01.2023 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), dismissing his appeal contesting his assessment under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") dated 28.03.2016 for Assessment

Shri. Hirabai Haridas Dattani(Late) by L.H. Sathish Chandra Haridas Datani, Kannur vs. The ITO Ward-1, Kannur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 796/COCH/2022[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Daslate Hirabai Haridas Dattani The Income Tax Officer (By L/H Satish Chandra Haridas Datani) Ward – 1, 100, Arman Cantonment Vs. Kannur Kannur [Pan:Aalph1136R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Arun Raj, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 09.6.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)], Dismissing His Appeal Contesting His Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dated 28.10.2010 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee In His Capacity As The Legal Representative (Lr) Of His Late Mother, Smt. Hirabai Haridas Dattani. On Enquiry With Shri Raj, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee; The Valakat In His Favour Having Been Signed By The Assessee Alone, It Was Explained That The Assessee Has Been Pursuing The Matter From The Assessment Stage Onwards. His Only Brother, Shri Arun Dattani, Had Since Expired & He May Accordingly Be Taken As Representing The Estate Of His Late Mother For An On Behalf Of The Family, I.E., Including His Four Sisters; His Father Having Already Expired. The Hearing In The Matter Was Proceeded With On That Basis.

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)

Sanjay Arora, AM This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order dated 09.6.2022 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)], dismissing his appeal contesting his assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 28.10.2010 for Assessment Year

Smt Sunitha Prem Victor, Trivandrum vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Trivandrum

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

ITA 1009/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dassunita Prem Victor The Income Tax Officer Tc 25/2813 Mathrubhumi Road Ward – 2(3) Vs. Vanchiyoor, Trivandrum 695035 Trivandrum [Pan:Akopv8566C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Divya Ravindran, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.10.2022 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)],Partly Allowing Her Appeal Contesting Her Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Dated 27.12.2016 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Returned Her Income For The Relevant Year On 18.12.2014 At Rs.5,67,250, Claiming Deduction Under Section 54 Of The Act At Rs.91,05,096 In Respect Of Construction Of A Residential House During The Relevant Year Against The Capital Gain Arising To Her On Sale Of 3 Pieces Of Land Sold During March, 2013 To November, 2013. The Claim Was, Admitting Her Mistake Inasmuch As The Capital Asset/S Sold Was Not A Residential House, Requested By The Assessee Vide Letter Dated 29.11.2016 For Being Considered U/S. 54F Of The Act; She Not Owning Any Other Residential House On The Date Of Transfer/S. Earlier, On 25.11.2016, A Revised Statement Of Income Was Filed Claiming Exemption With Reference To The Total

For Appellant: Ms. Divya Ravindran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

Sanjay Arora, AM This is an Appeal by the Assessee against the Order dated 26.10.2022 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)],partly allowing her appeal contesting her assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) dated 27.12.2016 for Assessment

Sh. Parmanand Sisodiya, Indore vs. ITO-1(2), Indore

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

ITA 202/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Parmanand Sisodiya, Ito, Flat No.404-405, Ax-18-C, 1(2), Satyamitra Paradise, Indore. Scheme No.71, Gumasta Vs. Nagar, Indore. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Alops1416K Assessee By Shri S.S.Solanki, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.10.2023

Section 54Section 54B

Vijay Pal Rao, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.05.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal, NFAC,Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- “1. That the ld. AO erred in not adjudicating the issue that

Sewa Sahkari Sammittee Maryadit, Beed, Mundi Khandwa vs. PCIT-1, Indore

In the result, appeal by the assesse is allowed

ITA 44/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisewa Sahkari Sammittee Pr. Cit-2 Maryadit Beed Indore Vs. Beed Mundi Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaufs0703N Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.10.2023

Section 12ASection 138Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

ACIT Central -2, Bhopal vs. Shri Naresh Tharani, Bhopal

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed and COs of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 113/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No.108/Ind/2021 & Acit Central-2 Shri Naresh Tharani Bhopal E-2/149, Arera Colony Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aampt6514G

Section 153C

only commission @ 1% is sustained. CONo.18 & 19/Ind/2022 The assessee has raised common grounds of appeal as under: “1. That the ld CIT(A), NFAC was not justified in confirming the assessment order, which is bad-in-law, void ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances ... case, liable to be annulled. 2. The Id CIT(A), NFAC erred in confirming the assessment order when it was evident from satisfaction note that the documents found during search and seizure operations, "pertains" to assessee and do not "belong" to assessee. 3. The Id CIT(A), NFAC

Pramodbhai Balubhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1)(3), Surat

ITA 622/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.622/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Pramodbhai Balubhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, D-204, Capital Status, Karan Park Ward- 3(1)(3), Road, Adajan, Surat – 395005. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adppp8613C (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 54E

order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 12.06.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income ... hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 18.12.2018. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “1. Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on fact to confirm AO’s addition of Rs.16,68,295/- for LTCG and Rs.16,68,295/- as STCG

Rameshchandra Budhiyabhai Ahir, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Bardoli

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

ITA 621/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.621/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Rameshchandra Budhiyabhai Ahir, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Pilutha Faliyu, At & Post – Ward-1, Bardoli, Income Tax Office, 2Nd Floor, Siyalaj, Tal – Magrol, Dist – Surat, Surat – 394110 Bsnl Building, Station Road, Bardoli-394601 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alfpa7625Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 51

order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 05.06.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ... condone the delay. The contents of the petition for condonation of delay, are reproduced below: ITA.621/SRT/2023/AY.2017-18 Rameshchandra B. Ahir “1. That appeal order of NFAC. Delhi is dated 05.06.2023 has been communicated through portal under the tab “For Your Information”. It is deemed to be served on 05.06.2023. Appeal

Sanjay Kumar Choudhary HUF, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer- 2(3)(6), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 618/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.618/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Sanjay Kumar Choudhary Huf, Vs. The Ito, 408, Saryu Diamond Complex, Ward- 2(3)(6), Jadakadi, Mahidharpura, Surat Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqhs5732R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himanshu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2023

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 30.08.2023, which in turn arises out of a penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income

Anisa Zuberahmed Mirza, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat

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

ITA 616/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.616/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Anisa Zuberahmed Mirza, Income Tax Officer, 5, Shalimar Appartment, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat, Room Salimar Society, Adajan No.303, Aaykar Bhawan,Majura Vs. Patia, Gate, Surat-395001 Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Crrpm8862L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144

order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 17.08.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

Shri Nehrunagar Co-Op. Housing Society, Surat vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 506/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.506/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2020-21) (Physical Hearing) Shri Nehrunagar Co.Op. Housing Vs. The Ito, Society, Ward – 1(3)(5), Umang Hall, Nehrunagar Society, Surat Ichchanath Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabas2271H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2023

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Surat [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 30.05.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income

Janakkumar Mukundprasad Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Bardoli, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 418/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.418/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Court Hearing) Janakkumar Mukundprasad Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Patel Bardoli Vs. 57 Omnagar, Tarsadi Kosamba (R.S) Surat-394120 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Auzpp 2106 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Ms. Chaitali Shah, Ca िनधा"रती की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 05/10/2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short, “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 18.04.2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of A Penalty Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer Ward-1 Bardoli, Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’), Dated 02.06.2017. 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 Assessing Officer Has Erred In Levying Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) When Assessing Office Had Not Specified In The Notice U/S 274 R.W.S. 271(1)(C) Whether The Penalty Was Leviable For Concealment Of Particulars Income Or For Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars Thereof. 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 Office In Levying Penalty Of Rs.3,09,062/- U/S 271(1)(C) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. 3. It Is Therefore Prayed That Penalty Levied By The Assessing Office & Confirmed By Cit(A) May Please Be Deleted.

Section 142(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, "SMC” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.418/SRT/2023

Bharatbhai Naginbhai Patel, Ankleshwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(4), Bharuch

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

ITA 393/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.393/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Bharatbhai Nagjibhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, 392, Nishal Faliu, Nava Haripura, Ward- 2(4), Sajod, Ankleshwar, Bharuch, Bharuch, Gujarat – 393020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bpppp4227M (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ashutosh P. Nanavaty, Ca Appellant By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 16/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2023

Section 143(3)Section 249(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT (SMC) BENCH BEFORE SHRI DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं

Aaradhna Develpoers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

ITA 179/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) dated 03/02/2023 and 06/02/2023 for the Assessment Year

Aaradhna Develpoers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

ITA 178/SRT/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Aaradhna Develpoers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

ITA 177/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Ushaben Vinodbhai Beladiya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 246/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.246/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Ushaben Vinodbhai Beladiya, Vs. The Ito, No.237, Vikram Nagar Society, Ward – 3(3)(1), Near Trikam Nagar, L.H. Road, Surat Surat – 395006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aimpb4673N (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT (SMC) BENCH BEFORE SHRI DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं

Krishan Kumar Yadav, Vpo-Gothra Teh-Tijara vs. ITO Ward - Bhiwadi, Alwar

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

ITA 577/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250Section 68

SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.07.2023 of ld. CIT (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed under section 250 of the IT Act for the assessment year 2009-10. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- “1. On the facts ... assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay, which reads as under :- “ 1. That the order was passed by NFAC, Delhi on 13.07.2023. 2. That the order was received by assessee who resides in the VPO – Gothara, Teh – Tijara, Alwar and due to remote location of assessee, there

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS-2), Jaipur

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

ITA 573/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271C

assessment year 2010-11. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (Appeals) NFAC has erred in law and on facts in passing order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without giving an adequate opportunity ... being heard and by not observing the principles of natural justice. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (Appeals) NFAC has erred in not allowing relief against order passed by AO under section 201(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 2 Oriental Bank

Central Academy Jodhpur Education Society, Jodhpur vs. Circle(Exemp.), Jaipur

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

ITA 543/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 164(2)Section 2

section 250 of the IT Act for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. The ld. CIT (A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee ... NFAC has erred on facts and in law in not deciding the legal ground of assessee that even if there is violation of provisions of section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2)(c)/(g) as well as section 2 Central Academy Jodhpur Education Society, Jaipur. 11(5) r.w.s