← 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

Bharat Trrigation P Ltd, Burhanpur vs. The ADIT, CPC Bengaluru, Bengaluru

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

ITA 186/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibharat Irrigation Private Ltd. Adit/Acit 138/1, Basad Fata, Khandwa Vs. Khandwa Road Burhanpur (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaecb 8975 G Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22 .09.2023

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

This appeal by the Assesse is directed against order dated 21.03.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y.2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CPC Bangalore erred

Chhappan Bhog, Bhopal vs. The NFAC Central, Delhi

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

ITA 184/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanichhapan Bhog Nfac Shop No.7 Delhi Hare Krishna Complex, Vs. 10 No Stop Arera Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaafc 7125Q Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22 .09.2023

Section 139(1)Section 140Section 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 272A(1)(d)

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Chhapan Bhog NFAC Shop No.7 Delhi Hare Krishna Complex, Vs. 10 No Stop Arera Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) PAN: AAAFC 7125Q Assessee by Ms. Nisha Lahoti, AR Revenue ... This appeal by the Assesse is directed against order dated 16.03.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi arising from penalty order passed u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act for A.Y.2017-18. The assesse has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts

M.P.Rajya Sahakari Bank Maryadit, Bhopal vs. The ACIT/DCIT-TDS, Bhyopal

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

ITA 183/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanimp Rajya Sahakari Bank Adit/Acit, Tds Maryadit Bhopal 131/11 Apex Bank, Vs. Zone-Ii Mp Nagar Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Bplm03419D Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)

This appeal by the Assesse is directed against order dated 17.03.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 01.03.2021 arising from order passed by the assessing officer u/s 201(1) /201(1A) of the Act for A.Y.2014-15. The assesse has raised following grounds

Ramesh Kumar Jain, Astha vs. The ITO, Sehore

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

ITA 131/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniramesh Kumar Jain Ito, Adinath Traders, Mandi Prangan Sehore Vs. Astha (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaspj 0162 G Assessee By Shri Arpit, Gaur, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

Section 234ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against order dated 20.02.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y.2013-14. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income

Darshit Developers, Valsad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Valsad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 471/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.471/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) Darshit Developers Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, C/O Kashmiraben Shaileshbhai Valsad Room No.204/Palak Vs. Patel/ Bhagwati Bunglowes / Arcade, Near Pali Hill, Tithal Maninagar Society, Tithal Cross Road, Valsad-396001 Road, Valsad-396001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aagfd 5807 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, Ar िनधा"रती की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing 05/09/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (In Short “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”], Dated 07.07.2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 19.12.2017. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. Ld. Cit[A], Nfac, Delhi Has Erred In Law & On Facts To Upheld A.O’S Reopening U/S 147 & Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Ignoring The Fact & Law That Incorrect Information Received From Ddit[Inv.] Does Not Give Jurisdictional To The A.O For Invoking Reassessment Proceedings Us/ 147 Of The Act. 2. Ld. Nfac, Delhi Has Erred In Law & On Facts To Upheld Addition Of Partner’S Capital Of Rs.12,50,000/- [Shilpaben Shah] As Well As Another Partner’S Capital Rs.12,50,000/- [Nipaben Shah] + Total Rs.25,00,000/- Ignoring The Fact That There Was No Business Activity Of Firm In The Year Under Assessment As Well As Partner’S Capital Contribution Cannot Be Treated As Income Of The Firm Considering Facts Of Appellant’S Case.”

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated 19.12.2017. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “1. Ld. CIT[A], NFAC, DELHI has erred in law and on facts to upheld A.O’s reopening u/s 147 and issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act ignoring ... incorrect information received from DDIT[Inv.] does not give jurisdictional to the A.O for invoking reassessment proceedings us/ 147 of the Act. 2. Ld. NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and on facts to upheld addition of partner’s capital of Rs.12,50,000/- [Shilpaben Shah] as well as another

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 382/SRT/2022[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 381/SRT/2022[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 380/SRT/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 379/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 378/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 377/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 376/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 375/SRT/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 374/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 373/SRT/2022[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(2), Surat

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

ITA 372/SRT/2022[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Surat22 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 156ASection 254(1)Section 31

This bunch of eleven (11) appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (in Short NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 14/10/2022 for the Assessment Year

Chief Medical and Health Office Annuppur, Annuppur vs. ITO-TDS-2, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 84/JAB/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 & 89/Jab/2023 (A.Y: 2014-15 To 2019-20) Chief Medical & Vs. Ito, Tds-2, Health Office, Room No. 102, Aayakar Amarkant Road, Bhawan, Napier Town, Annuppur-484224, Jabalpur-482001, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh.

For Appellant: Shri.Sapan Usrethe. Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri.SaadKidwai. CIT -DR
Section 194JSection 201(1)

PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: These are the six appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT (A) Delhi passed U/Sec 201(1) & Sec 201(1A) and 250 of the Act. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee ... given in form 35 notice should have been issued on that email as per the scheme of faceless appeal. 2.The learned CIT(A), NFAC was not justified in dismissing the appeal filed by appellant against the order passed by ITO TDS without giving any proper opportunity of hearing

Phoenix Poultry, Jabalpur vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Jabalpur

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

ITA 76/JAB/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalephoenix Poultry, Vs. Acit, Circle -1(1) 201, Ratan Colony, Jabalpur, Gorakhpur, Madhya Pradesh. Jabalpur- 482001. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Aajfp5811H Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dhiraj Ghai, Ca Respondentby : Shri, Shiv Kumar. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(1)And 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, CAFor Respondent: Shri, Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/s 143(1)and 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both ... PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/s 143(1)and 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both

Ashwani Kumar Sehgal, Katni vs. Income Tax Officer, Katni

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

ITA 46/JAB/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleashwani Kumar Sehgal Vs. Ito-1. M/S. Sehgal Industries, Katni-483501, Madhav Nagar Gate, Madhyapradesh. Katni-483501, Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Ajgps0132E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Sapanusrethe, Advocate.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shivkumar. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi /Cit(A) A Passed U/Sec 154 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri.SapanUsrethe, Advocate.ARFor Respondent: Shri.ShivKumar. Sr. DR
Section 154

PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi /CIT(A) a passed u/sec 154 and 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. 1. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal

Arihant Automobile, Jabalpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Jabalpur

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

ITA 28/JAB/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalearihant Automobiles Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2) 984, Wright Town, Jabalpur Jabalpur-482002, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Aahfa2701P Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement .09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(1)And 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/s 143(1)and 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Learned CIT erred in relating disallowance