“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

Vijay Kishin Bhatia, Mumbai vs. Office of the Income Tax Officer Ward 14(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1274/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevijay Kishin Bhatia, Vs. Ito, Ward 14(1)(4) 201,Golden Tower, Room No. 203, 2Nd 12Th Road, Khar West, Floor, Aayakar Mumbai-400052. Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. : Agnpb5248C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Manoj Pandit.Ar Respondent By : Ms. R.M. Brindha.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Manoj Pandit.ARFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Brindha.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23(5)

PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/ CIT(A) passed u/sec 143(3) and U/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. 1. In law and on facts

Sadanand Champakrao Manekar, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Begaluru

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

ITA 1516/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesadanand Champak Rao Vs. Dcit, Cpc Manekar Bangalore.-560500 C/O Sanjay Vhanbatte & Compnay, Cts No. 245, C/1, First Floor, Mahalaxmi Bank Bldg, Near Kelavkar Hospital Tarabai Park, Mumbai – 416003. Pan/Gir No. : Acepm7834N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Bhavesh Jain.Ar Respondent By : Shri Rp Veena.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Passed U/S 143(1) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal. Sadanand Champakrao Manekar, Mumbai. 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru By Way Of Adjustment U/S 143(1)(A) In Respect Of Employees' Contribution To Provident Fund & Esic Payment Of Rs. 14,21,489/- As Not Being Allowable As Deduction Under Section 36(1)(Va) As The Contribution Has Been Deposited With The Respective Authority After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Law. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A), Erred In Not Accepting The Contention Of The Appellant That Such Action Of The Dcit Does Not Fall Within The Ambit Of The Adjustments Prescribed Under Section 143(1)(A). The Appellant Craves Leave To Add To, Amend, Alter, Modify, Delete Or Add A New Ground Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh Jain.ARFor Respondent: Shri RP Veena.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s 143(1) and 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. Sadanand Champakrao Manekar, Mumbai. 1. On the facts ... circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi erred in confirming the addition made by the DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru by way of adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) in respect of Employees' Contribution to Provident Fund and ESIC payment

Lally Automobiles Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-15(2), Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed ex parte for statistical purposes

ITA 942/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediaita Nos.941 & 942/Del/2023 (Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20) Lally Automobiles Pvt. Vs. Dcit Ltd., D-196 & 160, Okhla Circle – 15(2) Ind. Area, Phase-I, Delhi New Delhi – 110 020 Pan No. Aabcl 1446 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By --None-- Revenue By Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.08.2023

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36

PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 31.01.2023 arising from the orders dated 16.10.2019 & 28.07.2020 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) concerning Assessment Years

Lally Automobiles Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-15(2), Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed ex parte for statistical purposes

ITA 941/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36

Sanspareils Greenlands Pvt Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Circle- 1(1)(1), Meerut

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 748/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediasanspareils Greenlands Vs. Acit Pvt. Ltd., C/O. Kashyap & Circle – 1(1)(1) Co., 114/214, Citi Centre, Meerut Begum Bridge Road, Meerut, Up-250 001 Pan No. Aaccs 2788 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Premjit Kashyap, C.A. Revenue By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.08.2023

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

ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT : This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 18.01.2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The effective grounds raised by assessee are as under: 1. “That on facts

Sanjeev Kumar Gupta, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-56(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 48/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 31.10.2022 arising from the assessment order dated 28.12.2018 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section

Sanjay Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Gurugram

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

ITA 2471/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediasanjay Kumar Ca Mr Vs. Ito Sahu M. Sahu & Ward- 4 (1) Associates Chartered Gurugram Accountant House No.651, 1St Floor, Sector- 10A, Nr. Union Bank Of India, Gurgaon Haryana 122001 Pan No.Cmipk8618J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36

PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 22.09.2021 arising from the intimation order dated 13.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section

ACIT, Circle-49(1), New Delhi vs. Goel Jewellers Overseas Corp, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1597/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 68

appeal in ITA No. 1597/Del/2022 by Revenue is filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 31/03/2022 for Assessment Year 2017-18 and the assessee filed Cross Objection No. 131/Del/2022 by supporting the order

Santosh Jain, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 147/RPR/2023[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Aug 2023AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 143, 145 & 147/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1993-94, 1994-95 & 1995-96 Santosh Jain Opp. P.N Tiwari, Gandhi Chowk, Durg (C.G.)-491 001 Pan: Afypj6194D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

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

Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 44A

ORDER PER BENCH: The captioned appeals filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 15.03.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O. u/s.271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘Act’), dated

Santosh Jain, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 145/RPR/2023[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Aug 2023AY 1994-95

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

Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 44A

Santosh Jain, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 143/RPR/2023[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Aug 2023AY 1993-94

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

Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 44A

Shri Vijay Tondon, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 93/RPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 93/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Vijay Tondon, H.No.34, Sector-1, Shankar Nagar Road, Gitanjali Nagar, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Abupt1550H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sakshi Gopal Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 54

RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 12.11.2021, which arises from the order passed by the A.O. u/ss.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘Act’), dated

The ACIT, - 4 (10, Indore vs. M/S Sanghvi Foods Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 22/IND/2023[2019-0]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2019-20 Acit, Sanghvi Foods Private 4(1), Limited, Indore. 362-Aa, Silver House, बनाम/ Scheme No. 74C, Vs. A.B.Road, Indore (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aaccs4128C Assessee By Shri S.N.Agrawal & Shri Pankaj Mongra, Cas Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 37Section 40A(7)Section 43B

Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 28.11.2022 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of intimation of assessment dated 10.05.2020 passed by CPC, Bangalore u/s 143(1) of Income

Vaishnavi Manufacturing and Marketing, Bharuch vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1) (1), Vadodara

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

ITA 345/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.345/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Vaishnavi Manufacturing The Dcit, Vs. & Marketing, Circle – 2(1)(1), Indraprastha Shopping Centre, Near Vadodara Asopalav Guest House, Ankleshwar Gidc, Bharuch, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabfv5170F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

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 27.03.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s