“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

Heidelberg Cement India Limited, Gurugram vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Gurugram

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2286/DEL/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Arya, Advocate

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

different orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals)]/National Faceless Appeal I.T.A. Nos. 2285 TO 2287/Del/2023 Centre [NFAC] dated 12.06.2023 for assessment years 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2015-16 in sustaining the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income ... Appellant had belief that he is eligible to claim additional depreciation and same was given as the explanation to the AO and the NFAC. The Ld. Counsel submits that the Appellant had offered a bona fide explanation and it is also undisputed that the Appellant had made complete disclosure

Heidelberg Cement India Limited, Gurugram vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Gurugram

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2285/DEL/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Arya, Advocate

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Subodh Kumar Jha, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 2237/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Advocate; &

assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to I.T.A. No. 2237/Del/2023 CIT (Appeals)]/National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC] Delhi, dated 21.06.2023 for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The assessee raised several grounds on merits and also the ld. CIT (Appeals) passed ex-parte

Jhumuklal Panigrahi, Bastar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Jagdalpur, Bastar

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our observations above

ITA 92/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.92/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Jhumuklal Panigrahi Prop. M/S. Jhumuklal Panigrahi & Sons, Ward No.9, Bhahmanpara, Main Road, Karitgaon, Dist. Bastar (C.G.)-494 221 Pan : Bjnpp2195L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Jagdalpur, Dist. Baster (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68

present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 31.01.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O. u/ss. 147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short

Bharat Bhushan Verma, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed in terms of the observations above

ITA 236/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 236/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Bharat Bhushan Verma Main Road, Verma Transport Bharat, Baikunth, P.O.-Baikunth, Raipur (C.G.)-493 116 Pan : Acdpv7254J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Oficer-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 11.05.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short

Smt. Soni Jha, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my observations above

ITA 118/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 118/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Soni Jha 11, 557, Om Shanti Nagar, Pt. Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar, Naya Talab, Gadhiyari, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Arcpj5940M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekass S. Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N. C Roy, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69

present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 09.03.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 147 r.w.s.144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short

Naresh Kumar & Sons HUF, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my observations above

ITA 247/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 247/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Naresh Kumar & Sons Huf 11/3, Near New Bus Stand, Pandri, Govind Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaghn0904E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri G.S. Agrawal, Ca : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 11.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CA

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), 2 Naresh Kumar & Sons HUF Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 10.11.2022, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3) of the Income ... impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: “1. That under the facts and the law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi erred in confirming the observation of the Ld. Assessing Officer that the Appellant was engaged in trading of vegetables rejecting the explanation that

Thekkumbhagam Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Idukki vs. The ITO Ward 1, Thodupuzha

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

ITA 166/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

Sanjay Arora, AM: The instant Appeal by the Assessee agitates the Order dated 08.12.2022 by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, dismissing the assessee’s appeal contesting it’s assessment under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated

Vishwakarma Educational Trust, Trivandrum vs. DCIT, Exemption Circle, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 901/COCH/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Cochin11 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasvishwakarma Dy. Cit (Exemptions) Educational Trust Aayakar Bhavan 14, Ulloor Lane Peroorkada Road, Kowdiar Vs. Dpi Junction, Jagathy Thiruvananthapuram 695003 Trivandurm 695014 [Pan:Aaatv1824D] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, Ca Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 12.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement:11.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Agitating The Dismissal Of It’S Appeal Contesting The Processing Of It’S Return Of Income Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Dated 30.10.2019 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19,By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department (Nfac, Delhi) [Cit(A)] Vide Order Dated 25.7.2022. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, A Charitable Trust Registered U/S. 12Aa Of The Act, Filed It’S Return Of Income For The Relevant Year On 28.8.2018 Declaring Nil Income, I.E., Claiming Exemption U/S. 11 On The Entirety Of It’S Income. The Same Was Processed U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act, Denying It The Benefit Of Section 11 Of The Act, I.E., At An Income Of Rs. 13,34,692. The Denial Of Exemption Was For The Reason Of Non-Audit Of It’S Accounts And, Consequently, Non-Filing Of The Audit Report, Required To Be Filed In The Prescribed Form (Form 10B), Along With The Return Of

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12Section 12(1)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

hereinafter ‘the Act’) dated 30.10.2019 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19,by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department (NFAC, Delhi) [CIT(A)] vide order dated 25.7.2022. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, a charitable trust registered u/s. 12AA of the Act, filed

Shri Ashish Kanjibhai Rathod, Rajkot vs. The DCIT, Cir-2(2)(2), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 152/RJT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. J. Boricha, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

against the appellate order dated 24.09.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “NFAC”), arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Vikram Udesangbhai Padhiyar, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(2)(4), Surat

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

ITA 596/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Surat11 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.596/Srt/2023 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Physical Court) Vikram Udeshanghbhai Income Tax Officer, Padhiyar Ward-3(2)(4), Vs F-3, Star Garden Residency, Surat-395001 New Katargam, Surat 394107 Pan No. Ckipp 5230 P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 144Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सुरत "ायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL

Vishal Rajendra Madhavani, Surat vs. Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 557/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.557/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Vishal Rajendra Madhavani, Vs. The Assessing Officer, A-702, Silver Spring Apartment, National Faceless Assessment Shree Ram Petrol Pump, Anand Centre (Nfac), Mahal Road, Surat – 395009. Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Asapm7005R (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Bipin Jariwala, Advocate Appellant By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 11/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11/10/2023

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

Physical Hearing) Vishal Rajendra Madhavani, Vs. The Assessing Officer, A-702, Silver Spring Apartment, National Faceless Assessment Shree Ram Petrol Pump, Anand Centre (NFAC), Mahal Road, Surat – 395009. Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ASAPM7005R (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Bipin Jariwala, Advocate Appellant by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Respondent by Date ... 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 14.07.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income

Ahluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 433/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra Addl. CITa

Section 143(3)Section 234B

assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 19-10-2022, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. In this appeal the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 2 AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS

Aparna Pradhan, Kendrapara vs. ITO Kendrapada Ward, Kendrapada

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

ITA 245/CTK/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack10 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144

Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 15.05.2023 for the assessment year 2013-2014. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is engaged in the business of brokerage, consultancy

K.C.Palia, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle.19(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2323/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm) I.T.A. No. 2323/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2014-15)

B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 6.6.2023 passed by Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2014- 15. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in confirming the disallowances made

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Hem Bhattad, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2314/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Hem Bhattad, National Faceless Appeal 104, Bajaj Bhavan, Centre (Nfac), Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Churchgate, Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaaah 2399 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit Circle-3(3)(1), Hem Bhattad, Room No. 609, Aayakar 104, Bajaj Bhavan, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Churchgate, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaaah 2399 L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Mr. P.D. Chogule, CIT-DR

Section 37Section 40

PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2018-19 HEM Bhattad, National Faceless Appeal 104, Bajaj Bhavan, Centre (NFAC), Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Churchgate, Mumbai-400021. PAN No. AAAAH 2399 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2018-19 DCIT Circle-3(3)(1), HEM Bhattad, Room

Jagmohan Kabra HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO-31(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2293/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Shyam SabooFor Respondent: MS Smitha V. Nair

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

Choudhry, JM: The Assessee has preferred this appeal against the order dated 25.04.2023 impugned herein passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi {in short ‘NFAC’}/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (in short Ld. Commissioner”) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2 Jagmohan Kabra

Surekha Arvind Jain, Mumbai vs. The ITO Ward-32(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2288/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Piyush ChhajedFor Respondent: MS Smitha V. Nair

Section 250

Choudhry, JM: The Assessee has preferred this appeal against the order dated 28.04.2023 impugned herein passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi {in short ‘NFAC’}/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (in short “ Ld. Commissioner” u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2 Surekha Arvind

ITO, Ward-31(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sharda Vinod Bhatia, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2257/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalito – 31(2)(1), Vs. Sharda Vinod Bhatia, Room No. 248, 2Nd Floor 201, Model Town, Kautilya Bhavan, Mahesh Ashish Units Bkc, Bandra(E), Chs Ltd, Off Jp Road, Mumbai- 400051. 4 Bungalow, Andheri(W), Mumbai-400058. Pan/Gir No. : Aghpb6897P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Rameshwar Meena.Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri.Bharat Kumar.AR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The revenue has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC),Delhi /CIT (A) passed u/sec 271(1)(c) and U/sec 250 of the Act. The revenue has raised the grounds of appeal: 1. "Whether on the facts and in circumstances

Zeenat Ganesh, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for the statistical purposes, on the same terms

ITA 2236/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2023AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JotwaniFor Respondent: MS Smitha V. Nair

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 69B

Member: The Assessee/appellant herein has preferred these appeals against the orders dated 01.03.2023 & 27.05.2023 impugned passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi {in short ‘NFAC ’}/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (in short “ Ld. Commissioner” u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short